[darcs-devel] [issue557] Wishlist bug: add safety guards against well-known dangerous actions

[zooko]

> For instance, unpull and obliterate could be separated so that unpull
> requires the user to specify a repository "from which" the patch is
> unpulled.  darcs unpull would then refuse to unpull the patch if the
> patch did not exist in that repository.  The repository would  
> naturally
> default to the same repository as with darcs pull, darcs push etc.   
> This
> way, it would be impossible to unpull the last copy of a patch,  
> because
> to unpull it, there must always be a repository where it still exists.

+1

But by the way, I still believe that "unpull" is a confusing name  
that should be deprecated.  If you create a patch and push it and  
then "unpull" it what happens?  Well, what happens is fine, except  
that the user is confused and doesn't understand why you can unpull  
something that you didn't pull.  This isn't just my own personal  
intuition -- it is something that I have personally witnessed more  
than once.  (It also matches my own personal intuition.)


> Another measure, not much more complicated, would be a feature to  
> track
> whether a patch has been distributed.  Every repository could simply
> have a list of not-yet-distributed patches and protect against
> unrecording or amending patches that have been distributed.

+1

Regards,

Zooko