Changes between Version 11 and Version 12 of DarcsEvaluation


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Jul 23, 2008 8:41:02 PM (6 years ago)
Author:
batterseapower
Comment:

Add details of IRC meeting and tweak SCM advantages

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • DarcsEvaluation

    v11 v12  
    2727   at least some Windows users don't consider it to be bad). 
    2828 
    29 == Comparison of darcs relative to other systems == 
     29== Current status == 
     30 
     31On the 23rd July 2008 an IRC meeting on the #ghc channel decided to make a serious effort to replace Darcs, due to all the problems described above. The logs of that meeting are available in full at [http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/attachment/wiki/IRC_Meetings/ghc-metting-2008-07-23.log], but the main conclusions were: 
     32 
     33 * The GHC developers have sufficient problems with Darcs that a change would be beneficial 
     34  
     35 * We want to stick with distributed version control, and have a widely-used and well-supported system, so Mercurial and Git are the only real 
     36   contenders 
     37 
     38 * Mercurial and Git and percived as being mostly feature-and-performance comparable, although git is more popular 
     39 
     40 * More investigation of the Mercurial option for GHC is needed, especially in light of reported poor support for Windows with Git. This 
     41   work is ongoing 
     42 
     43== Darcs alternatives still in the running == 
    3044 
    3145!ToDo.  Compare workflows using darcs with the same workflow in other systems.  Igloo suggested one basis for comparison: 
     
    7185=== Mercurial === 
    7286 
     87Advantages: 
     88 
     89 * Speed comparable to Git 
     90 * Some operations become feasible (bisect, annotate) 
     91 * Many helper tools 
     92 * Good Windows support 
     93 * HTTP and SSH sync possible, but unknown how this compares to Git native protocol sync speed 
     94 
     95Disadvantages: 
     96 
     97 * Similar problems with bisect support as Git 
     98 * (Unknown: suitability of command set?) 
     99 
    73100=== Git === 
    74101 
     
    86113 * bisect support would require git modules to also pick the correct version of libraries.  Keeping this in sync is not easy, atm. 
    87114 * uses its own protocol for network transmission (http works but is slower, however, other hosting services are available, e.g., github) 
     115 
     116== Eliminated alternatives == 
    88117 
    89118=== Bzr === 
     
    104133 * UI is rather different from darcs (which current contributors are used to). 
    105134 
     135Reason for elimination: lack of uptake and hence more risk of Bzr becoming unmaintained. 
    106136 
    107137=== Darcs === 
     
    118148 * Uncertain future: no critical mass of hackers/maintainers.  The technical basis is not well enough 
    119149   understood by enough people. 
     150 
     151Reason for elimination: persistent performance and algorithmic problems, see above. 
    120152 
    121153== Dependencies on darcs ==