[darcs-users] documentation suggestion

[Zack Brown]

On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 07:38:16AM -0400, David Roundy wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 26, 2003 at 10:55:22AM -0700, Zack Brown wrote:
> > 
> > I'm trying to compile darcs, but I haven't met all of the dependencies on
> > my system yet, so the compile keeps failing with errors. However, getting
> > back to a clean tree to make another attemptis also difficult:
> > 
> > 10:45:28 [zbrown] ~/site/tmp/darcs/darcs$ make clean    
> > GNUmakefile:150: .depend: No such file or directory
> > Rebuild dependencies ...
> > ArgumentDefaults.lhs: can't locate import `System.Console.GetOpt'
> > make: *** [.depend] Error 1
> > 10:45:31 [zbrown] ~/site/tmp/darcs/darcs$ 
> 
> Hmmmm.  What version of ghc are you running?

5.02.2 - straight from Woody.

> It looks like your ghc is too
> old and doesn't have the System.Console.GetOpt.  You could try replacing it
> (in ArgumentDefaults.lhs and DarcsCommands.lhs) with just plain "import
> GetOpt", which is an older version of the library (and I believe
> deprecated).  If you're using ghc 5.04.2, and this is the only problem,
> I'll just go back to using plain GetOpt everywhere...
> 
> The problem here (with the make clean) is that the makefile tries to
> calculate the dependencies using ghc, and if that fails, things look ugly.

Ah. I guess it would be easier for folks to only have to rely on standard
packages from whatever OS we're using...

> 
> > I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong. Maybe a Quickstart file in the sources
> > would be good. It could describe the dependencies and the basic commands to
> > get darcs compiled.
> 
> I've added a "Building darcs" section to the manual to give this sort of
> information.

Very nice! It looks *really* easy to contribute. I wondered whether 'push'
would require that I be on a list or something, and just update your tree
automatically, but no, it just sends you an email containing the patch.

Is it possible to allow other people to push directly into a repository,
without going through you? So multiple people could all have write
access without bottlenecking one person? I can see how it would be done
with procmail, but is there a more direct route?

One more documentation suggestion: is it possible to have a form of the manual
that is all on one page? So there would be both the normal page-by-page
version on the web site, and there would also be a link to an 'all in one
page' version.

Be well,
Zack

> -- 
> David Roundy
> http://www.abridgegame.org
> 
> _______________________________________________
> darcs-users mailing list
> darcs-users at abridgegame.org
> http://www.abridgegame.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users

-- 
Zack Brown