Andrew Coppin wrote: > Trent W. Buck wrote: >> I don't know why, but a lot of people I spoke to seemed to have that >> impression, and I essentially had to wave changelogs under their face to >> convince them that darcs was still being worked on *at all*. I had to >> point out that it was a *release* announcement -- how could a dead >> project have a new major version? >> >> Perhaps a chirpy journalism major should be writing vapidly up-beat >> announcement posts, denying even the possibility of problems :-P >> > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but... I was under the impression that Darcs is > a revision control system. It controls revisions. > > Well Darcs already does that. So... what's to develop? It's not like > it's slow or buggy. I can't actually think of any features it doesn't > have that I want. So... what now?
Erm, actually it is. Both. Well, at least the slow bit is still quite there in 2.0, though better. The IndempotentMerge problem? I guess it sounds like this is better in 2.0, though not completely fixed. I still laugh when I remember droundy telling me something along the lines of, "No, that is NOT an infinite loop. It will finish in a couple of weeks." <grin> -- John _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
