From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: Darcs Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2007 16:21:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <46a038f90706241345m4b5ecb80p9f4ec840993023e0@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=us-ascii Cc: Bu Bacoo , git@vger.kernel.org To: Martin Langhoff X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Jun 25 01:21:21 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1I2bOQ-0002Xi-56 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 25 Jun 2007 01:21:18 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751422AbXFXXVO (ORCPT ); Sun, 24 Jun 2007 19:21:14 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751418AbXFXXVO (ORCPT ); Sun, 24 Jun 2007 19:21:14 -0400 Received: from smtp2.linux-foundation.org ([207.189.120.14]:56364 "EHLO smtp2.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751226AbXFXXVN (ORCPT ); Sun, 24 Jun 2007 19:21:13 -0400 Received: from imap1.linux-foundation.org (imap1.linux-foundation.org [207.189.120.55]) by smtp2.linux-foundation.org (8.13.5.20060308/8.13.5/Debian-3ubuntu1.1) with ESMTP id l5ONLAB5003455 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 24 Jun 2007 16:21:11 -0700 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by imap1.linux-foundation.org (8.13.5.20060308/8.13.5/Debian-3ubuntu1.1) with ESMTP id l5ONL57J023009; Sun, 24 Jun 2007 16:21:05 -0700 In-Reply-To: <46a038f90706241345m4b5ecb80p9f4ec840993023e0@mail.gmail.com> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.561 required=5 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0-osdl_revision__1.12__ X-MIMEDefang-Filter: osdl$Revision: 1.181 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.53 on 207.189.120.14 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, 25 Jun 2007, Martin Langhoff wrote: > > The darcs commandset (init, push, pull) is what git, hg and bzr have > today in common. I really think the credit goes to BK, not darcs. BK is why a lot of git commands look like they do: I didn't want to re-implement BK, but I definitely wanted to reimplement the flow. At least for common stuff. The fact that darcs may have been more usable than other open source scm's says more about the other open source scm's than it says about darcs. arch/tla in particular was (is?) horribly messy. I tried to look at it before starting git, but even just a cursory look convinced me to look away.. Linus