Óscar Fuentes <[email protected]> writes: > Does it contain serious bugs?
Not AFAIK. > Do you recommend to *not* use it? I don't. DVC does work, and one of the reasons why people are not hacking on it as much as in the past is that it's not too bad as it is, and does not _need_ to much improvement. That said, I'm using the command-line more than DVC these days, so maybe I'm not the best judge. > Are you really interested on patches? (I mean, have DVC a user base so > the patches are useful for them?) Usually, reasonable patches sent to the list are quickly merged by Stefan. The user base might not be huge, but probably >100. According to http://stats.gna.org (slash) download.gna.org (slash) dvc (modified so that the bots do not find it to avoid Referer spam) the tarball is downloaded around 50 times a month. > The new VC implementation in Emacs 23 is very complete on some areas > (and totally lacking on others). It is okay to send patches wich > delegates DVC features on VC functions, when DVC is buggy and VC does > the right thing? Can't speak for others, but this is something I wanted to do, but I never found time to do it. OTOH, if you can keep Emacs22 compatibility for some time, it's better. -- Matthieu Moy http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/ _______________________________________________ Dvc-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/dvc-dev
