On 28/04/2011 03:21 PM, Chris Smith wrote:
On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 08:04 +0200, Bardur Arantsson wrote:
There's also the fact that using in-repo branches means that all the tooling doesn't have to rely on any (fs-specific) conventions for finding branches.
As someone who has admin'd a reasonably large Bazaar setup (where branch == directory similarly to Darcs) I can honestly say that this would be a HUGE boon.
Just keep in mind that adding branches withing the repository is a massive increase in the conceptual complexity of the system, and it would IMO be very un-darcs-like to adopt something like that into the core mental model you need to use a darcs repository, only because of incidental conveniences
Convention, rather than baking answers into tools, is the right way to solve organizational problems, and that's essentially what we're talking about here. And adding complexity every time someone has an awkward use case will lead (has led, in more systems than I can count) to an unusable result in the end.
It seems half the people here think that having multiple branches per repo is a fantastic idea, while the other half think it's a stupid idea. Perhaps there is room for more than one revision control system based on change-sets in this world?