On Jan 24, 2009, at 8:41 AM, Tommy Pettersson wrote: > Darcs (and SVK) are "not recommended", because the alternatives can > all handle large repos, whereas darcs can not
Sounds like a reasonable recommendation. I would be interested in having some automated generation of graphs of darcs performance and scalability, generated by the buildbot. > The article also describes darcs' repo-is-a-branch-is-a-repo as > inflexible compared to the competitors. This puzzles me, because I > find this freedom *extremely* flexible. But I have not used any of > the other systems, so I don't know what I'm missing out on. Yes, this is a common criticism of darcs. I can't tell whether there is really some advantage to the way other dvcs's have separate notions of branches and of repos, or whether the users of those systems are mistakenly thinking that darcs's branch==repo causes some problems that it doesn't. Regards, Zooko --- Tahoe, the Least-Authority Filesystem -- http://allmydata.org store your data: $10/month -- http://allmydata.com/?tracking=zsig _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list darcs-users@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
