[darcs-devel] random rebase feedback

Eric Kow eric.kow at gmail.com
Sat Jun 16 17:32:56 UTC 2012


Bunch of things I noticed working on Aditya's branch

0. Rebase is really nice.  I forgot about the core workflow (unsuspend/suspend), and had been walking around thinking in terms of rebase pull.  The core workflow is great for force-reordering patches.

1. we should log the original patch date
2. we should log the rebase author
3. we want darcs rebase changes (Ganesh is unsure about how to display the fixups)
4. we should suppress the "you're not foo!" warnings on unsuspend time
5. if we insert the rebase author in the patch log, it'd be great if amend was smart enough to notice that while you may not be the original author, you are the rebase editor, and so amending the patch is OK

Unfortunately, 1/2 don't really fit together.  You've got two fields and two choices, date vs author.

Right now rebasing gives you rebase-date/orig-author

Losing the original date is bad (from an archaeological point of view), but it'd be tricky to keep it in the metadata (amend would clobber), so I think it should go in the patch log.

We don't want the patch to look like it was authored by the rebaser, so I guess what we get is something that looks like this:

    16 June (rebase date), Aditya (original patch author)
    Name of patch

    Rebased by Eric Kow <kowey at darcs.net>
    Original patch date: 2012-05-28 10:30Z

Bit of a brain dump

-- 
Eric Kow <http://erickow.com>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 203 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/darcs-devel/attachments/20120616/86751485/attachment.asc>


More information about the darcs-devel mailing list