[darcs-users] Re: Pin-based branching & merging

[Tobias Oberstein]

sorry for time lag .. here's a short reply

 > I think the principle sounds great.  Personally, when I use a system
 > with powerful, fine-grained merge capabilities like darcs[1], I worry 
 > a bit that it will silently merge things that are logically
 > incompatible.
 > Being able to encode more information about the logical nature of a
 > patch in that patch could be a win.  That said, your idea is very
 > abstract to me.  I think I would need to see real examples to really

Coming from a math background, I was exposed to heavy conditioning
on abstracting and generalization, but thought the slides with fancy
colored "pins" would be very intuitive .. at the moment, "pins" are
the best metaphor I'm aware of to catch the idea. Unfortunately,
I cannot provide more examples at the moment due to lack of time ..

 > think about it, and in addition it would help to have experience with
 > high-conflict-volume usage, which I lack.  Is there a system which
 > uses
 > pins effectively today?

I'm not aware of one.

 > BTW, if I understand correctly, there is a mistake on diagram 3.In
 > the
 > third column, both repositories I and II have made an "e & c" patch
 > consisting of a line (D and E repsectively) prepended to the file;
 > however the result is different in the two cases (in I, a new pin is
 > added, in II, none).

So you found it;) No, just kidding, you're right:
the patch to repository I that leads to column 3 should read: "e & cp".

Greets,
Tobias