Don't be sorry — I didn't pay any money for it and it was my decision :-)
I think darcs suffered because it set high expectations. I remember being fascinated with the "theory of patches". The web site looked very promising. And it was written in Haskell, so it had to be correct, right? :-)
I liked the simplicity of the command-line interface of darcs. I just never looked around for 1M+ LOC projects using it on a daily basis. I should have been more careful.
I still use darcs for a number of small things and I'm happy with it. I'm happier with Git, mostly because of its practical approach and the freedom it offers ("text is just text" and "you own your history, do whatever you want to it").
I think darcs suffered because it set high expectations. I remember being fascinated with the "theory of patches". The web site looked very promising. And it was written in Haskell, so it had to be correct, right? :-)
I liked the simplicity of the command-line interface of darcs. I just never looked around for 1M+ LOC projects using it on a daily basis. I should have been more careful.
I still use darcs for a number of small things and I'm happy with it. I'm happier with Git, mostly because of its practical approach and the freedom it offers ("text is just text" and "you own your history, do whatever you want to it").