Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by throwaway81523 1544 days ago
There was some muttering on the fossil site somewhere about supporting git format. Darcs was another thing like that, which was superior to git in most ways I can think of, while fossil has an anti-rebasing ideology that makes it unacceptable for certain types of git workflow. I don't know how that can be resolved while switching to git format. I do like integrating issue tracking with source control.
1 comments

Unfortunately darcs suffered from the patch-of-doom problem, where if you were unlucky an exponentiation merge would kill all performance of your repository.

The darcs FAQ from 2012 reports it as still unfixed:

http://darcs.net/FAQ/Performance#is-the-exponential-merge-pr...

(Yes this was real, and yes we hit it. I liked the patch-centric darcs approach, but that was enough to make us migration to mercurial, then later git.)