[darcs-users] multiple heads

[Declan Naughton]

>  It might help your understanding if you think of darcs as being a little
>  more like multiplayer quilt than some sort of mercurial clone with different
>  commands.  Darcs is (thankfully) like no other revision control system out
>  there, and it can definitely take some getting used to.  Making sweeping
>  statements about it's design before you understand what it's trying to
>  achieve probably won't endear you to anyone, though.

The thing is, I adore patch theory, but it is the only thing that I
miss in Hg. It is not for the typial use case I wish to apply darcs OR
hg though. I am going to be encapsulating something (unless I feel the
need to reimplement patch theory on something custom), and messing
around with things until I have a type of repository I desire for my
audience's needs and a tool to interface with it.

So, my understanding of darcs isn't that perfect. That's the idea
behind the questions I'm asking.

A vanilla darcs could actually work for me, but I want these things
which make for a not-such-a-good workflow pattern compared to hg and
others (IMO) to be rationalised before I decide to go with that.

Keith, thanks for the explanation, I really picked that quote up wrong
from the manual. Of course CVS sucks! lol.

I'm still thinking about what workflow improvements WOULD be worthwhile......

-- 
Declan Naughton