[darcs-users] Darcs in kernel-like development model

[Nicolas Pouillard]

Excerpts from Tristan Seligmann's message of Sat Feb 09 04:15:19 +0100 2008:
> * Miklos Vajna <vmiklos at frugalware.org> [2008-02-08 11:51:36 +0100]:
> 
> > On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 09:47:39AM -0600, John Goerzen <jgoerzen at complete.org> wrote:
> > > People use various tools to do this.  Patch queue management tools
> > > like quilt or Mercurial's mq are common.  Others use git with frequent
> > > use of its rebase feature, or Mercurial with transplant.
> > 
> > the rebase feature is needed because in git every commit has one or more
> > parent. in darcs, this is not necessary, if you create patch A and then
> > patch B, then you *can* push patch B only, without pusing patch A. so no
> > need to have a rebase-like feature.
> 
> This is only true if patch B does not depend on patch A. If I understand
> correctly, it should theoretically be possible to attempt to commute A
> and B, resulting in a conflict, but darcs does not have any way to
> perform such an operation. In addition, to resolve the conflict, you
> would either need to record another patch, or amend-record B, which
> produces a new patch B' that now conflicts with B (!!).

How  behave  rebase-like feature when there is conflicts, do they provide with
some sensible results?

-- 
Nicolas Pouillard aka Ertai
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/darcs-users/attachments/20080209/e7462dac/attachment.pgp