
On 29/05/07, Jules Bean
Doug Kirk wrote:
No offense to the darcs creators, but
1) Only current Haskellers use it; everyone else either uses Subversion or is migrating to it;
If that is true, then they have missed the point. DVC is a real win for most workflows.
The applicable alternatives to darcs are : bzr, git, mercurial, tla. They have different pros and cons which are discussed at length on various blogs.
svn just doesn't make the list; it's not a comparable project, because it's centralised. SVK is more plausible but since it is essentially a hack to implement decentralisation on top of centralisation, it has different design constraints than things designed from the bottom-up as decentralised.
How do the differing design constraints make svk not comparable? As far as I understood it, it's a decentralised version control system that happens to layer over a very popular existing system, and which therefore gets some of its goodies like working over http. osfameron