'lo all, Note that (1) SourceForge does not require use of CVS; and (2) darcs needs no special SourceForge configuration/tools to be usable. One can start with just storing the darcs repository (-ies) for a project on SF, and export it through SF's web space. You could also run darcs.cgi there, for just viewing patches. And you can easily put your own darcs binary on an SF server, so that 'committers' can push changes to the SF-stored repository. All this is quite easy to set up, without requiring special privileges. (And if a lot of people start to do this, then SF could perhaps start supporting darcs officially. I'd love them to, but it's definitely not required.) So frankly I don't see the advantage of creating a special HaskellForge, at least from a source control perspective. Groetjes, <>< Marnix -- Marnix Klooster marnix.klooster@ssaglobal.com

-----Original Message----- From: haskell-bounces@haskell.org [mailto:haskell-bounces@haskell.org] On Behalf Of Sven Panne Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 13:25 To: Samuel Bronson Cc: haskell; brian-l-smith@uiowa.edu Subject: Re: [Haskell] HaskellForge

Samuel Bronson wrote:

...

The thing is, Haskell people tend to want to use Darcs for their Haskell stuff, and I don't think there are sites like sourceforge supporting it yet...

So my question is (probably once again): Why can >100.000 projects live with SF and not the Haskell community? Although CVS is not my favourite version control system, I'd happily use it if I get the rest of SF for free then.

I have the very strong feeling that we are experiencing a "not invented here" + "we can do it better" scenario... :-[ I see the need for Cabal/Hackage, but I am far from being convinced that building a SF-like site from scratch is the right way to go. Either collaborating with the SF people or modifying GForge looks more promising and economical to me.

Cheers, S. _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list Haskell@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell