While darcs is nice it needs wider adoption. When it comes to a project that people are working on, you have almost as many boxes as you have developers and for a revision control program to be adopted and used there has to be binaries for all those devels. AFAIR there are some issues with the win32 binary? One of our devels had major problems with it and now we're living with both a cvs and a darcs repository, and noone really knows where to send patches. I think it's safe to say that our project is dying, if not dead already.
Not that I blame darcs or anything, just that one need to be sure that darcs work for everyone before commiting to it. CVS works on all platforms and is well tested. Darcs will hopefully get there.
And yes, I did my part and created a package for my platform. It's linked from the binary download page.
CVS doesn't have atomic check-in, it's directory handling is crap, etc. etc. Still, like you said, it's probably still the best bet if you want to do development on both UNIX and Win32, although Subversion(!) is catching up fast.
CVS "works" on all platforms as much as it "works" on any platform, which is obviously what the poster meant.
Subversion is catching up fast, because it has crossed the line of "better than CVS" for direct use by developers, though CVS still wins in terms of IDE integration. SVN was designed to replace CVS, but not to revolutionize the theory of version control. Based on TFA, it sounds like Darcs isn't mature enough to adopt quite yet, but in a few months it may be. (I felt
One of our devels had major problems with it and now we're living with both a cvs and a darcs repository, and noone really knows where to send patches. I think it's safe to say that our project is dying, if not dead already.
Isn't the problem that you didn't make a firm commitment one way or another at that juncture? You had the option of either going all darcs or all CVS. It seems like instead of confronting the issue at the time, you let your project self destruct.
You could have chosen to switch to C
Although the moon is smaller than the earth, it is farther away.
Needs wider adoption (Score:5, Interesting)
Not that I blame darcs or anything, just that one need to be sure that darcs work for everyone before commiting to it. CVS works on all platforms and is well tested. Darcs will hopefully get there.
And yes, I did my part and created a package for my platform. It's linked from the binary download page.
Re:Needs wider adoption (Score:2, Insightful)
CVS doesn't have atomic check-in, it's directory handling is crap, etc. etc. Still, like you said, it's probably still the best bet if you want to do development on both UNIX and Win32, although Subversion(!) is catching up fast.
Re:Needs wider adoption (Score:2)
CVS "works" on all platforms as much as it "works" on any platform, which is obviously what the poster meant.
Subversion is catching up fast, because it has crossed the line of "better than CVS" for direct use by developers, though CVS still wins in terms of IDE integration. SVN was designed to replace CVS, but not to revolutionize the theory of version control. Based on TFA, it sounds like Darcs isn't mature enough to adopt quite yet, but in a few months it may be. (I felt
Re:Needs wider adoption (Score:1)
Isn't the problem that you didn't make a firm commitment one way or another at that juncture? You had the option of either going all darcs or all CVS. It seems like instead of confronting the issue at the time, you let your project self destruct.
You could have chosen to switch to C