Titus Brown wrote:

>-> How is the Quixote source hosted?  I gather from one of the e-mails
>-> today it's using some other alternative to CVS?  Would that be an option
>-> for a sandbox?  It would need near-unrestricted write permission, and
>-> not too burdensome for the user to install client software.
>
>I have a Darcs repository that I'd be happy to lend out.  It's on an
>underutilized co-loc that's configured for virtual hosting, and it's
>where I'm keeping all of my little projects:
>
>       http://darcs.idyll.org/~t/projects/
>
>As I understand it, it's relatively easy to set up something that lets
>you submit signed patches via e-mail with darcs.
>
>I can set up any hostname/e-mail combination that someone can reassign,
>and I'm happy to give out a few accounts to admin-type people.
>
>Oh, it runs FreeBSD.  Installing software is generally a breeze ;).
>
>cheers,
>--titus
>
>

I've heard several requests for Subversion, one offer for Darcs, no
requests for CVS, and a "no" from David on hosting at MEMS.  I won't be
able to contribute further for a while but here's my vote:

** +1 for any Subversion-Based system similar to SourceForge

** Making a web CVS/Subversion interface plugin for Quixote is a good
idea but sounds like a big project.

** I know nothing about Darcs except a quick look at the web site, so
I'm hesitant to say yes.  If everyone agrees it's OK, and it has a
command-line client similar to Subversion with the usual
commit-update-conflict concepts, OK.  I'm just not hot on learning the
idiosynchracies of another tool.  I already have to use both Subversion
and CVS for different projects, and I barely got out of using Perforce.