move to a more generic contact page

[git.ikiwiki.info.git] / doc / about_rcs_backends.mdwn

diff --git a/doc/about_rcs_backends.mdwn b/doc/about_rcs_backends.mdwn
index d1454bdda5d58421d4acb7062708e8ec4b1e5d04..c20fa5cc3195165c8a81faaa2797dee5be3bcffd 100644 (file)
--- a/doc/about_rcs_backends.mdwn
+++ b/doc/about_rcs_backends.mdwn
@@ -29,6 +29,8 @@ see [[commit-internals]].
 
 You browse and web-edit the wiki on W.
 
 
 You browse and web-edit the wiki on W.
 

+W "belongs" to ikiwiki and should not be edited directly.
+

 
 ## [darcs](http://darcs.net/) (not yet included)
 
 
 ## [darcs](http://darcs.net/) (not yet included)
 


@@ -103,6 +105,18 @@ 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.
 
 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:
 ## [[Git]]
 
 Regarding the Git support, Recai says: