Ideally we could use Phabricator instance on haskell.org for Xmonad
to have a proper code review (+extra) tool to avoid Github's super
simplistic and insufficient review system that doesn't even preserve
patch history.
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 1:05 PM, Carsten Mattner
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 7:33 PM, Antoine Beaupre wrote:
On 2015-03-10 14:17:15, adam vogt wrote:
Antoine,
You've done enough (I've recorded a patch and put it into contrib).
Next time you could follow: https://wiki.haskell.org/Xmonad/xmonad_development_tutorial which goes over how to record a patch.
I admit I was scared to get into darcs again. :)
I don't have a problem with Darcs myself but I'm open to change my mind regarding Mercurial or Git migration even though I was against it the last time it was suggested here.
If a migration happens it should host the git repo on git.haskell.org, googlecode.com (where the issue tracker is) and wherever else, but a Github monoculture is dangerous and a crazybad idea. Fossil does it right with integrating tickets and docs in the repo but implementation details are not ideal. Github culture removes the D in DVCS for monetary and Facebook'ish lockin reasons and it's bad for everybody but Github.com shareholders.
Do we know how many contributors were put off by Darcs to not submit a patch and should do migrate or Mercurial or Git?