[darcs-users] Re: always long comment

[Eric S. Johansson]

Samuel A. Falvo II wrote:

> On Wednesday 14 July 2004 07:15 am, Eric S. Johansson wrote:
> 
>>log files really don't work for me because I'm not that organized. 
>>I'm frequently working on two or three sets of parallel changes or bug
>>fixes and cycle between them as they need attention.  Maybe if there
>>was something like a darcs log feature or I could just pop up an
>>editor, dictates and notes into a template containing date stamp, what
>>files have been changed at that moment  ( --summary) and then record
>>those changes into a log which could then be applied (after suitable
>>editing) to a record.
> 
> 
> ???
> 
> I re-read the above paragraph some six times already.  I'm still VERY 
> confused.  How is this different from just popping up an editor to edit 
> a log file, then using "darcs record --logfile=..." to commit the 
> record?  I will admit, the bit about auto-time-stamping and the like is 
> completely new, but still permissible within the framework I documented.

it might be because log files not well explained.  It also requires way 
too much manual handling as you so thoughtfully demonstrate below.

let's assume for a minute that log files will work and I just didn't 
recognize the pattern.  And if I was to sit back and write yet another 
set of scripts to do a more full featured log file function, is that 
really the right solution to the problem?

I will argue that their needs to be an additional layer over the raw 
nuts and bolts so that we spend one programmers were the effort creating 
the tools and make it easier for thousands to get on with their tasks 
and not crank out infinite variations on the same tool over and over again.

I'm going to take your comments and think about this a bit more to 
figure out what would be a decent high-level solution.

---eric