[darcs-devel] Re: [darcs-users] Re: Darcs check grows out of control
Zachary P. Landau
kapheine at gmail.com
Mon Mar 20 12:17:54 PST 2006
>
> > I can't really tell when patches are accepted.
>
> I've got the following patches of yours in my mailbox:
>
> - ``Do not reread freshly written patch when recording'', rejected
> due to Ian's opposition (which I happen to disagree with, but he's
> the better Haskell programmer); I'll accept this patch when you
> convince Ian;
> - three patches dated 14 Jan 2006, which I will push as soon as you
> find a better name instead of ``--file'' (as I've mentioned, I like
> ``--logfile'', but it's up to you, I'm only doing the complaining);
> - ``Add -i as an alias for --interactive'', which should get in (I was
> waiting for somebody to object, but nobody has for now).
The second and third one sound like patches from me, not Aaron. And
while I'm here, I might as well comment on one of them.
I am fine with using --logfile as long as people don't find it confusing. As
I think I mentioned, it isn't really a logfile when used with send. But maybe
reusing an option people already know is less confusing than moving things
around. I don't really care either way, once I see the command in the help
list I can manage. It could be
--use-the-following-file-as-input-for-the-given-command.
That's assuming DarcsArguments.lhs supports GNU very-long options.
Anyway I believe I made the logfile->file rename as a separate patch, so
you should be able to apply the rest of the patches and just leave off
that one if you prefer --file. If you go to apply it and there are problems,
drop me a note and I'll fix it.
--
Zachary P. Landau <kapheine at gmail.com>
More information about the darcs-devel
mailing list