[darcs-devel] [patch661] Allow to amend-record patch by removing some hunks

Gabriel Kerneis kerneis at pps.jussieu.fr
Fri Jan 6 20:30:18 UTC 2012


On Fri, Jan 06, 2012 at 08:11:07PM +0000, Eric Kow wrote:
>  - The changes get offered in reverse order. I'll switch that to 
> forwards order.
> 
> Don't we want it to behave like unrecord would?

I don't think so, at least in a given file it would be very confusing to review
chunks in reverse order.

>  - Should we offer a splitter (allowing for interactive edit) like we do 
> for rollback?
> 
> I *think* so, on the basis that we (at least I) think that part of what 
> makes darcs friendly is few-concepts-broadly-applicable.  So I think as 
> a general principle we want to have mechanisms that exist in one context 
> exist in all the contexts that they make sense in.

I agree with the principle, no idea about the implementation.

>  - What should we do with --all?
> 
> Ah, so the question here is what happens when somebody types in darcs 
> amend-record --unrecord --all?
> 
> One option is to treat it as synonymous for darcs unrecord, end of 
> story.

I would vote for this one with a warning, but then emitting a confirmation
might conflict with the idea of --all?  In that case, refusing with an error
message and suggesting to unrecord instead would be sensible.

-- 
Gabriel


More information about the darcs-devel mailing list