I agree about the convenience of having multiple branches in a single repo, as opposed to the darcs way which is one working directory per branch. For one thing, I never found a convenient way to switch between branches in an IDE when using darcs. For another, having a separate working copy for each branch consumes disk space unnecessarily. (Hopefully with the popularity of SSDs these days, people are less likely to reflexively respond "disk is cheap," but just in case: with git, all branches of my current project fit on my USB stick; with darcs, they wouldn't. It also makes a big difference for copying times.) darcs repos can be deduplicated using hard links, but that only affects the patch history--the working copy is still duplicated.[edit: removed question that was answered by sibling post]
No comments yet.