[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