[darcs-users] darcs for managing patches?
aj at dungeon.inka.de
Mon Nov 10 18:15:08 UTC 2003
I wonder if or how darcs can help me.
Like so many, if been burned by cvs way to work: people who don't
talk to other developers, but simply do whatever changes.
On the other side I read the linux-kernel ML for some time now
and admire the way they work: by sending patches to ML, discussing
them there and some main developer can accept the patch or not.
So the way I currently work is this:
two checkouts of some cvs repository, anoncvs as project
and project.orig. Then I do whatever changes I want, recompile
and test, and if I like the result, i "make distclean" the
checkout, and generate a diff between project/ and project.orig/
so all added and remove files are in that diff.
Often I work on several issues at the same time, so then I have
the manual work of chopping the diff into several files, one
for each issue, and send some of the patches to the ML for
inclusion into the project.
sometimes I keep a patch and revert the changes to project/,
so I can test the other changes I did without that one. I
can add it later again. but that doesn't happen often.
the biggest waste of time I have so far is this:
because of changes in the upstream I need cvs update,
create a new diff, and chop it into several patches again.
So, I wonder if there is some rcs software that will help
me maintaining the patches the way I work. for example
I'd love if I could say after doing some changes "this is
patch xyz" or "this is an update to patch abc" and let
the rcs record this information, so I can later say
"what patches are in this repository as opposed to the
original" and "give me patch xyz as diff against head".
Most rcs documentation has those pictures with a base
version, a left branch, a right branch, and then a merge
of that. Using those pictures, my working checkout would
always reflect a merge of many branches, and every
patch abc or xyz would reflect some branch xyz or abc
and rather than merging several branches into a common
version, I have a common version and I'm trying to
push some changes into a branch for identification.
I guess I'm trying to do the opposite of what is normal?
anyway, do you think darcs can still help me?
thanks for your advice.
More information about the darcs-users