Hi, On Sun, 4 Jun 2006, Pedro Kröger wrote:
> Johannes Schindelin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Also, if you want to ditch cvs, you always leave somebody behind. For > > example, from what I understand, Han-Wen likes darcs very much... and I > > know plenty people (me included) who don't like it. Same goes for every > > version control system, but at least people are _used_ to cvs. > > Could you tell why you don't like darcs? I'm just curious to hear. I've > been using darcs for some time but I'm considering to try git as well. <disclaimer>I am not trying to offend anybody. Just stating my opinions here, so no need to get mad at me, although you are free to call me an idiot.</disclaimer I don't like darcs for several reasons: - I need to install a completely new compiler to patch darcs (Haskell does not bother me as much; I could learn it). - the whole bruhaha about the "theory of patches" and that it is connected with some concepts from quantum mechanics is _soooo_ seagull consultant. It has written BS all over it. - It is _slow_. I had the pleasure of having to work with tailor, which is a program to convert between different Version Control formats, and which is written in darcs. My experience is that git beats it any time of the day. - It is buggy. When trying to convert the repository of tailor itself with tailor into git format, I hit a bug in darcs early on. - It does not seem to focus on version control, but on changing the order of patches. Thus, it is more similar to quilt than to a version control system. - It lacks a nice GUI where I can see what happened in a particular branch. In fact, I am not quite sure that you actually get the whole history, what with all the patch reordering. - The repository format itself is fragile, just as cvs'. It is based on patches, so if there is one single patch corrupt, you loose the history from then on. - AFAIK darcs has not even started to handle complicated merges gracefully. In contrast, git handles modifications in one branch, and a rename in the other quite well. - git makes it _really_ easy to access older version without checking them out. For example, I can get the differences in lily/music.cc between version 1.3.108 and 2.9.7 with "git diff lilypond_1_3_108:lily/music.cc lilypond_2_9_7:lily/music.cc". If I thought long and hard, I could probably come up with more reasons I don't like darcs, but I think you got an idea. BTW, the git repository I set up, tracking lilypond's cvs, is still online. Containing all history of the cvs repository, the first download is about 55MB. Feel free to play with it. Ciao, Dscho
_______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
