Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: darcs vs tla

[Thomas Lord]

    > From: Anand Kumria <address@hidden>

    > On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 12:47:30 -0800, Thomas Lord wrote:

    > > I opened my mind for this darcs thread and it looks like I'm going to 
wind
    > > up where I started:  they have some rather esoteric merge technology 
that
    > > could be added to arch;  aside from that, they are missing too much.  
    > > Would have been better if darcs had, in the first place, been done as an
    > > extension to arch.   Meanwhile, their novel merge tech is "on the list 
of
    > > things todo" but not a high priority.

    > > (Does that sound insulting towards Darcs?   It doesn't at all if you
    > > regard darcs as a short-term R&D exploration.)

    > Time for 'a diagnosing darcs', then?

That's more or less what just went by in this thread.

-t