On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 12:36 AM, Francesco Ariis
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 01:05:06PM +0100, Carsten Mattner wrote:
Do we know how many contributors were put off by Darcs to not submit a patch and should do migrate or Mercurial or Git?
I submitted a very small patch to Xmonad some time ago. The guide provided to submit a patch was clear, darcs UI very intuitive, the submit-to-mailing-list path streamlined.
An herein lies the gist of if what separates those who favor quick patching via Github's web interface from those who not only submit a patch but are also very likely to stay around answering questions or maintaining a module. Not saying git is a worse tool it's just not the limiting factor in contributing for serious contributors and trivial patches can be done based on someone's suggestion or diff without further contributor involvement. But if git injects new blood into Xmonad development let's migrate. Hey we can start off by fixing the screenshot links on the homepage and doing stable releases.
I cannot digest git; it is much more unfriendly to the "casual contributor" to me, I often end up frustrated using it. It is a very popular choice though (even if I would expect someone contributing to a Haskell project to at least have heard of Darcs).
Git is like the C of vcs. it is very flexible and you can mold it to your workflow perfectly but it's very easy to mess up. Darcs is like other tools with a streamlined workflow that might limit its flexibility but serves a well defined purpose. So far git's data structures first design has proven to be a good decision.
And yes, I must admit it, it feels nice using (and hence generating important feedback) a tool developed in Haskell, by Haskellers, for Haskeller.
Add Yi and it's the perfect trio.