Brian Downing wrote:
> Git has some nice email patch-sending and patch-applying tools available
> (obviously; it's how quite a lot of business in the kernel gets done),
> but they are not version-controlled in the Darcs sense.
This--to me-- is the key answer to "Why?". For distributed projects
such as the kernel, making it easy to create and trade patches with
eachother is critical. My impression of SBCL is that it is a similar
situation: SBCL has a few key hackers that work fairly independently and
then a lot of little guys submitting pieces here and there.
> Now that I am used to Git, however, I much prefer it
> to Darcs. ("git citool" gets me my killer feature of Darcs as far as
> usability, which was being able to commit individual hunks in a file.)
Committing individual hunks in a file changed the way I view source
control... I think for the better. I love this aspect.