web commit by http://ethan.betacantrips.com/: update for 1.42; reformat

[ikiwiki.git] / doc / about_rcs_backends.mdwn

diff --git a/doc/about_rcs_backends.mdwn b/doc/about_rcs_backends.mdwn
index 84081d6a71c1dcd9e8fc3a0ca8a4c8987a908cf2..6cc8108a7e2163d21052a28263f5d8a405fb33c3 100644 (file)
--- a/doc/about_rcs_backends.mdwn
+++ b/doc/about_rcs_backends.mdwn
@@ -33,7 +33,8 @@ You browse and web-edit the wiki on W.
 ## [darcs](http://darcs.net/) (not yet included)
 
 Support for using darcs as a backend is being worked on by [Thomas
-Schwinge](mailto:tschwinge@gnu.org).
+Schwinge](mailto:tschwinge@gnu.org), although development is on hold curretly.
+There is a patch in the [[patchqueue]].
 
 ### How will it work internally?
 
@@ -102,6 +103,18 @@ by Ikiwiki.
 This approach might be applicable to other distributed VCSs as well, although they're not as oriented
 towards transmitting changes with standalone patch bundles (often by email) as darcs is.
 
+> The mercurial plugin seems to just use one repo and edit it directly - is
+> there some reason that's okay there but not for darcs? I agree with tuomov
+> that having just the one repo would be preferable; the point of a dvcs is
+> that there's no difference between one repo and another. I've got a
+> darcs.pm based on mercurial.pm, that's almost usable... --bma
+
+>> IMHO it comes down to whatever works well for a given RCS. Seems like
+>> the darcs approach _could_ be done with most any distributed system, but
+>> it might be overkill for some (or all?) While there is the incomplete darcs
+>> plugin in the [[patchqueue]], if you submit one that's complete, I will
+>> probably accept it into ikiwiki.. --[[Joey]]
+
 ## [[Git]]
 
 Regarding the Git support, Recai says:
@@ -161,4 +174,4 @@ CGI operates on M. rcs_commit() will commit directly in M.
 If you have any question or suggestion about the Mercurial backend 
 please refer to [Emanuele](http://nerd.ocracy.org/em/)
 
-## [[tla]]
\ No newline at end of file
+## [[tla]]