[darcs-users] User interface for conflicts: confusing enough to lose data

David Roundy droundy at abridgegame.org
Sat Jul 31 10:27:50 UTC 2004


On Tue, Jul 27, 2004 at 12:51:54PM -0400, Andrew Pimlott wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 27, 2004 at 06:27:24AM -0400, David Roundy wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 26, 2004 at 09:09:35PM -0400, Andrew Pimlott wrote:
> > > If this is done, may I request the diff3 variant in which all three
> > > (potentially N+1, where N is the number of contributing patches) versions
> > > of the file are shown: with patch a, with patch b, and with neither?  Two
> > > versions are really not enough to resolve a conflict.  (Other formats
> > > with equivalent information would be interesting to consider.  For
> > > example, the original plus the text of the N conflicting patches; or the
> > > N new versions plus the text of the N patches...
> > 
> > That does sound like a good idea.  On the other hand, depending on how
> > things were done, one might be able to see the original version by running
> > a darcs whatsnew, which might in some ways be a "cleaner" way of looking at
> > things.
> 
> A diff of a conflict can be tricky to interpret.  Maybe there should be
> a "darcs cat" to see a repository version.  It would also be nice (I
> think it's already been raised here) to provide the conflicting patch
> names so one could look at them directly, but that is probably precluded
> by the limitation you noted in the current code.  You may be right that
> trying to shove all the information into the file is a losing game.  But
> I would still like to try it, because having everything right there in
> your editor is pretty handy.

Yes.  Note that I did say it sounded like a good idea... just good to think
of all options before deciding.  :)
-- 
David Roundy
http://www.abridgegame.org




More information about the darcs-users mailing list