[Chart] Repository status

[Tim Docker]

I agree with Malcolm - i think it only that the server side repo version is old. It was created in 2006. I'll try and find time to upgrade this soon, as those ugly faces are a bit off-putting.

I've no real desire to switch to git either. I've recently started using git at work, and it seems to have little extra to offer small projects like this one. Other than market momentum, and mainstream acceptance I guess.

Tim


On 19/05/2012, at 7:44 PM, Malcolm Wallace wrote:

>>    $ darcs get http://www.dockerz.net/repos/chart
>>    ***********************************************************************
>>      _______   Sorry for the wait! The repository you are fetching is
>>     |       |  using the DEPRECATED 'old-fashioned' format. I'm getting a
>>     | O   O |  hashed copy instead, but this may take a while.
>>     |  ___  |
>>     | /   \ |  We recommend that the maintainer upgrade the remote copy
>>     |_______|  as well. See http://wiki.darcs.net/OF for more information.
>> 
>>    ***********************************************************************
>>    Finished getting.                                                           
>> 
>>    Warning: CRC errors found. These are probably harmless but should be repaired.
>>    See 'darcs gzcrcs --help' for more information.
> 
> Most likely, this is just darcs telling you that you have a newer version than the version that created the remote repository.  Darcs 2.x introduced new repository formats, and I gather the darcs developers are getting increasingly upset when projects have failed to upgrade format after a large number of years - these warnings used to be much smaller and less loud.
> 
> The CRC errors reflect the fact that darcs had a bug in that area at some point in the past, that has now been fixed.  Sensibly, newer versions (with the bugfix) can recognise and cope with the errors introduced by earlier versions.  As the message says, these are harmless.
> 
> Personally, I would be quite happy if the Chart repo were to be upgraded to one of the newer repository formats, eliminating both of these warnings.  However, there is a tradeoff in which darcs-2 format should be chosen.  For existing well-used repos, the FAQ at http://wiki.darcs.net/FAQ#should-i-convert-my-repository-to-the-darcs-2-format suggests that hashed-format is probably to be preferred.
> 
> As for switching to git, my personal opinion is please don't.  I have used git daily at work for a couple of years now, and it remains utterly confusing, frustrating, and often remarkably slow.  It is always a relief to switch back to darcs for projects like Chart.
> 
> Regards,
>    Malcolm