John Goerzen <jgoer...@complete.org> writes: > [Git] has submodule support, which means we can view a logical big > project, or individual subprojects. (darcs would have no way of > dealing with a logical big repo, and wouldn't scale to that anyhow.)
GHC's repository is maintained as a set of darcs-1, with a wrapper script ("darcs-all", IIRC) to act on all of them at once. That seems to be what you're calling "submodules". Admittedly GHC are not happy with the current darcs-1 situation, but they were sufficiently impressed with darcs-2 that they put their git migration plans on hold. > Personally I am unconvinced of the merits of a monolithic (whether > literally or logically) repo, when a simple shell script with "for" > could suffice. I concur, in the absence of subtree checkouts. That is, for a repo "foo", the ability to checkout a copy of just the "foo/bar" subdir. Obviously svn and cvs make that easy, but AFAIK no dVCS supports it (though Mercurial claim they intend to). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-haskell-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org