From: Eivind Eklund <eeklund@...>
Date: 2006-01-06T20:42:55+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby projects and interfaces to revision control systems (Darcs vs. Cogito)

On 1/5/06, Jeffrey Dik <jeffrey.dik@myrealbox.com> wrote:
> I think Darcs' niche is for "not huge" repositories, which is probably
> 99.9% of all Ruby projects.
[...]
> At work, I'm planning on setting up a system to use both Darcs and
> Subversion.  Subversion is the main repository.  I'll be able to run a
> command like "rake darcs" within one of the subprojects that will make a
> new Darcs repo with that subproject and all of its dependencies.  Then
> I'll be able to take that Darcs repository to the lab downstairs (where
> I can't reach the Subversion repository) for testing or to a client's
> site.  I can make any changes necessary.  When I get back to my main
> development computer, I'll be able to run something like "rake
> darcs-import" which will take each changeset (patch) and commit it to
> the Subversion repository.

Note that for really large projects, Subversion (AFAIK) lack
distribution infrastructure.  That's probably the primary reason *BSD
is still with CVS - we distribute the repositories using cvsup. 
There's also developer inertia, of course.  I notice that KDE has
actually switched to Subversion, so it's obviously possible to use
with a fairly large scale now.

Eivind.