Eric Kow writes: > I think the original author of this page, Mark Stosberg (?) was > intending a sort of compare and contrast approach in talking about > workflows, ie. that > > - darcs and git *both* support preparation branches > - darcs also supports spontaneous branches
Git supports spontaneous branches, I use them all the time. *Everything* ends up on a branch for a few minutes at least; how much more spontaneous can you get? :-) The difference, as everywhere else, is that Darcs supports cherrypicking as a first class operation and nobody else does. > retroactively branch+cherry pick if you want. I tend to suspect that > Darcs workflows need less branching, that it's easier to work in a > single branch (due to the set-of-patches approach and exact patch > application), but maybe I just don't use Git enough to have a proper > appreciation of branching? I suspect that it's more that very few projects really need branching the way the Linux kernel does. Some users (like me) can take advantage of the hyperflexible branching that git provides to work around the lack of first-class cherrypicking. Others will be much happier with the real thing. Still others are happy with very linear workflows using neither branching nor cherrypicking, as ordained by their boss. _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
