ron minnich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > darcs requires people to get a Haskell and build it. Not so sure I like > this.
We solved this problem by distributing statically linked binaries. Not ideal, but generally workable. Feel free to use them: http://dist.xwt.org/darcs/ > In the end, what does arch do better than bitkeeper? I think for many people (including me), BitMover's recent shenanigans are more of a factor than the technical merits of their code. But I really don't want to start that argument here. I do not claim that darcs (or arch) has any features that BK lacks, except perhaps simplicity. - a _______________________________________________ Linuxbios mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
