[darcs-users] Goodbye Darcs

Kirill Smelkov kirr at landau.phys.spbu.ru
Tue Oct 7 18:31:17 UTC 2008

Hi Simon, Mark, Miklos, All ...

On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 10:36:26AM -0700, Simon Michael wrote:
> Hi Kirill,
> thanks for the goodbye, it was poetic. :)


> If you get the time, I'd be glad to know more:

First of all I'm sorry for my late reply. I'll happily answer your
questions, here you are:

> what is the NAVY project ?

It's the union project of several nautical solutions our company
provides for navy -- ECDIS, Integrated Bridge Systems, etc ...


> What was the size/age/work patterns of your repositories ?

We had ~ 30 repositories from smallest ones (~100 patches) up to the
biggest repo with ~3000 patches. Some were first converted from CVS 3
years ago, and some were just born with darcs. The workflow was
basically to clone central repo, to 'work work work', then to record
patches, review them, and then merge back.

> What darcs  versions were you using ?

We were constantly tracking latest darcs releases 1.0.4, 1.0.5, ...
1.0.9, and recently darcs-2.

> What problems forced you to switch ?

Although I love 'darcs record', various operations like 'darcs diff',
'darcs annotate' (through darcsweb usually), etc... started to be very
slow. Also, we needed to start managing bigger codebase than we had
before + lack of good win32 support made us looking for the replacement.

> What have you switched to ?

Basically, 'darcs record' was a killer feature for us, and right after
I've discovered record extension for mercurial
(http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/index.cgi/RecordExtension) we
started approbating it.

For some time we used Mercurial for several sub-projects, plus I myself
used hg a lot in SymPy (http://www.sympy.org/) project.

But my own imho is that hg is nice, but various bugs and inconveniences
make it hard to use it productively.

That's why git, which have similar, but (imho) supperior design, much
better performance, 'darcs record' like patch recording UI (git add -p),
much more effective in keeping repo small, with in-repository branches,
with in-embrio AI things (it can e.g. track that some function was moved
from one file to another), and with great community and good dynamics
won for us.

We switched to git completely.

> Six months from now, how is it going ?

I hope it will be going well, but one never knows :)

If you drop me a note at that time, I'll be glad to share our

On Fri, Oct 03, 2008 at 11:22:57AM -0400, Mark Stosberg wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 16:44:45 +0200
> Miklos Vajna <vmiklos at frugalware.org> wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 05:54:20PM -0400, Mark Stosberg <mark at summersault.com> wrote:
> > > Although, I must say I was sorely disappointed when I tried "git commit
> > > --interactive" recently.  I wanted to do an interactive record of
> > > different hunks in a single file and it didn't seem to be possible!
> > 
> > For the record, it is possible: use git add -i and select 'p' (patch),
> > or just git add -p.
> Selecting "p" for "patch" to express limiting an action to a specific file is
> not at all intuitive to me.

Mark, you want 'git add -p'. You can even create new alias in your
~/.gitconfig and call it 'git record'

This, and other things are illustrated here:


Thanks to all for you interest,
Goodbye Darcs old friend,
you shall be missed ...


More information about the darcs-users mailing list