On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 09:55:05PM -0500, Robert L. Read wrote: > I still insist that we use either Darcs or subversion. I think Darcs > may be better, but > subversion is much more standard. > > A primary concern must be the each with which the average user, > including the > non-LISP expert, can extract our work. > > We are not so large a project that we have to optimize our use of the > source > control system; we should instead optimize the availability to users. > > In fact subversion is promptly better based on that argument. >
I've used darcs in another project and found it fantastic and generally straightforward. In terms of "trouble to the end user" darcs fares quite well. A linux user simply installs darcs via a package system, and then issues "darcs get http://www.whatever.org/repo"; to grab a repository. Recording and sending patches is relatively simple as well. Because of the interactive nature of recording and sharing patches, a five-sentence tutorial should suffice to get the new user up and running. -Erik _______________________________________________ elephant-devel site list elephant-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/mailman/listinfo/elephant-devel
