[darcs-devel] conflicted rebase (or rather: rebase with conflicted fixups)

[Ganesh Sittampalam]

Hi Ben,

On 16/06/2020 18:09, Ben Franksen wrote:

> I changed my mind about the three rebase variants. After thinking very
> hard about this for quite some time, I came to the conclusion that
> variant B is the best we can do. It has flaws, but it works as expected
> in most cases and with the problematic ones at least it doesn't crash.

Thanks for the update. The whole situation is quite unsatisfying :-(

> In practical terms, this means you can regard all the rebase changes for
> variant B as accepted. I am not going to review them all in detail
> simply because I am very near to burning out on this whole rebase thing.
> I hope you will continue to add more test cases that clarify what works
> and what does not and, if possible, add a bit more user-level
> documentation for rebase.

I will definitely look at writing more test cases, I think some of these
discussions have crystallised some of the expected properties nicely.
Documentation is also something I should have written many years ago but
never quite happened, so I am less optimistic but I will try to make
myself do it.

> But mainly, let's move on toward getting 2.16 out. We made made so many
> really great improvements to darcs in the last two or three years and I
> am the only one who profits because I am the only one who actually uses
> the head in anger. This is stupid. We should release more often.

FWIW I only didn't use the head because I find my old "stash" branch
from several years ago very convenient. I'm not even using 2.14 :-) But
given the all the other stuff that's changed I probably should switch.
Maybe we can crystallize some of the ideas for in-repo branching after
2.16 is out.

Cheers,

Ganesh