Why not just use darcs tag --checkpoint to means alpha?

[Paul Dufresne]

The more I think about this, the less it make sense to me of using
one repository for alpha (stable), and one for main (developement).

I think we should have just one Slate repository.
One would use darcs get to "get" what we call main.
And one would use darcs get --partial to "get" what we now call alpha.
There could be some tag without --checkpoint after the "alpha one",
making it easy to go back for different versions after last --checkpoint,
but one would have to bootstrap it himself.

Generated files: [vm.c, vm.h, little.image, big.image] would be made 
accessible
by ftp or http in a directory whose name would correspond to the tag name.
Or they could be in an other darcs repository called let's say vm, that 
would
be tagged each time with the same name as the slate repository, and with
the --checkpoint directory. Again, to download latest "alpha" vm, one would
do darcs get --partial http://slate.tunes.org/vm or just darcs pull to 
retrieve
the latest "alpha" vm.c, vm.h, big.image and little.image.
This would require to manually copy these files to the slate repository,
but I believe this is a small price.

Part of the reason for this, is that I'd like to be able to work on alpha, 
but still
be able to send patches, without sending one for alpha, and one for main.
And avoiding such problems like the one we had, with the SDL README
file, that I believe was caused by applying an alpha patch on main, or a 
main
patch on alpha.

This would probably reduce a lot the traffic. In part because context of the 
patch
is listing all patches to the latest tag.

--Paul