On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 09:01:19 +0100, Florent Becker wrote: > [sorry for going into coq-specifics]
This sounds like a great place to be having this discussion. > Finally an idea: how about making darcs-user the default destination for > patches > against camp and the camp paper. This would not change the signal to noise > ratio > here in a perceptible way, but it would convey the message that the theory > and the > implementation are going forward. Or maybe this is is two proposals in one? That camp patches go to a mailing list, and that the camp mailing list me merged into the darcs mailing list. I have no opinion either way. For the conflicts work getting to darcs-2, I think we created an auxiliary list, darcs-conflicts, but it didn't get used very much. I do hope that one of the results of the Hackathon is that we get a clearer picture on our long term darcs 3 strategery. For example, do we continue the path of chipping away at the darcs source, continuously massaging and refining it until we get to point where we've turned darcs-core into a standalone library and can choose to import camp-core as well? Or do we go the route of writing a whole new revision control system on the side and flipping the switch one day? And if we choose one path or the other or even if we decide to hedge our bets by trying both paths at once, how do we go about it? When do what things need to happen? I won't go into all the details (I'm still sorting them out for myself in my head and paper so that if I can make the most use of Ian's time if we get a chance to chat about this), but I think it will be good to have a few more explicit ideas about The Future. -- Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow> PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
