[darcs-users] Moving toward 1.0 (was: Default binary masks)

David Roundy droundy at abridgegame.org
Sun Nov 23 19:49:33 UTC 2003


On Sun, Nov 23, 2003 at 10:22:36AM -0800, Kevin Smith wrote:
> David Roundy wrote:
> >I'm starting to thing that we'll be reaching 1.0 time early in next year
> >(maybe January or February?),
> 
> That sounds great to me. Do you have a specific "todo" list of tasks 
> that must be completed before you'll be comfortable calling it 1.0? 

Well, the repo format transition must be complete, for one thing.

Some time before 1.0 I plan on making a listing of all the darcs options
and having a vote (on this list) as to which ones deserve single-character
short flags (and which flags for each).  Also going over possible changes
of flag names.  Some of them like --look-for-adds are awfully verbose just
because I couldn't think of anything better at the time.

Obviously the manual needs going over, not only the theory section, but
also the getting started and introduction.

I want to be confident in darcs' correctness with respect to crashing and
locking and the repository integrity.  I think darcs gets this right, but I
want to look over it again.

I want to get a reasonable way of browsing the repository working.
Currently the only good way to browse the repo is with the darcs cgi
script.  This works, but the code behind it is ugly, the pages it creates
are ugly, and who really wants to run a web server just to browse their
local repo?

My current idea is to add one or more darcs commands for exporting
repository info (preferabley with --xml-output as an option), which could
be used to create a replacement for the cgi script.  I've been
procrastinating on this a bit, partly because I'm not sure how to organize
it.  An actual implementation of a browser (either via a cgi script or
statically generated web pages) is important, since it'll mean that I've
actually made enough information available to implement such a browser.
It's important that there be a mechanism available (other than hacking on
darcs) to get such information out of a darcs repository.

Some sort of search capability would also be nice to add, although this
could be done after 1.0.

> Perhaps you could structure your existing TODO (assuming it is up to
> date) to indicate targets of 1.0 and post-1.0.

I've updated the TODO a bit (it wasn't up to date), and separated it into
pre, post and either before or after 1.0 sections.  Patches to the TODO
(via either push or pull) are welcome along with feature requests...
perhaps that would help keep the TODO up to date.  I'm sure I've forgotten
something.
-- 
David Roundy
http://www.abridgegame.org




More information about the darcs-users mailing list