Hi
"I would contribute to darcs if only..."
The darcs2 announcement strongly suggested that darcs would no longer be developed. This was brought up in the #ghc discussion about whether to switch.
I agree strongly with this. I would be much more likely to contribute if the project seemed active and alive. The darcs 2.0 announcement read like an obituary, and that put me off. The impression I came away with (accurate or not), was that the entire program had been rewritten, I was going to gain incompatibilities, and be using an untried/tested version which was not going to get any support. The message also seemed to be threatening me that if I didn't upgrade you would break into my house and wipe my data - instead of the usual enticement with cool new features :-) [Of course, a few emails/blog comments/interactions with Eric has shown me there is some life in the project - but I think a lot of people get jumpy when it comes to version control software] One thing that might help is splitting bits of darcs into libraries. There have been various things in darcs which are now separate libraries - ByteString and FilePath both have/had parallels in darcs. By making a separate library you get a better documented interface, a cleaner separation of concerns, and people can contribute small patches to self-contained elements, rather than a big application. You also provide additional benefits to the general community :-) Thanks Neil