[darcs-devel] Re: darcs patch: add FileSystem module with basic impleme... (and 3 more)

[Karel Gardas]

On Wed, 29 Dec 2004, Mark Stosberg wrote:

> On 2004-12-29, Karel Gardas <kgardas at objectsecurity.com> wrote:
> >
> > Agree, I've also thought about it. What do you think is the best way how
> > to descript --set-scripts-executable and --dont-set-script-executable
> > options? i.e. what darcs get --help should print? Do you think simple
> > `make scripts executable' is enough?
>
> That's fine for the short in-line help that is displayed. In the manual
> I think it's worth going into more detail. If you tell me which commands
> will have this flag, I'll write those docs.

Thanks, I appreciate it.

> I found that 'get' has these flags. Wouldn't you also want them
> on 'pull' and 'apply'?

Sure! Get is just first command to show the way how things will work for
patch review. I plan to also modify apply, pull, unpull and unrecord as
suggested in PR#99.

> Like 'get', those options would allow you to have the executable flag
> set differently the repo you are pulling/pushing from.
>
> Another point worth discussing: There is another 'opposite' of the
> '--set-script-executable' flag. It's:
>
> --unset-script-executable
>
> Are there cases where a script would be executable in a remote repo, but
> you want to take away that permission bit locally? I personally don't
> think I would use that feature.

I'm not sure I understand you here, but seting scripts executable is just
local behaviour independend on what's in remote repository, i.e. I'm
talking here about file permissions not file contents in the remote repo.
So if you have remote repo with executable scripts from which you get/pull
and do not use -e, then you will get all scripts non-executable exactly
like with darcs 1.0.x.

Karel
--
Karel Gardas                  kgardas at objectsecurity.com
ObjectSecurity Ltd.           http://www.objectsecurity.com