[darcs-users] Re: Patches are immutable

Mark Stosberg mark at summersault.com
Wed Nov 17 19:32:27 UTC 2004

On 2004-11-17, David Brown <darcs at davidb.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 06:20:21PM +0000, Mark Stosberg wrote:
>>  From my experience receiving and reporting bugs against CVS-hosted
>> projects, the standard answer is: "Try again with the latest version and
>> let us know if it's still there". 
> Let's not strive to be only as good as CVS.  Many CVS trees are so poorly
> managed it is amazing that the tip _ever_ even builds.
> In commercial environments, a customer may be unwilling to apply any
> patches that don't fix problems that have been demonstrated on their
> system.

So to be clear, is darcs particularly deficient in this regard in some
way way now?  It would seem with it's good support cherry-picking
changes it would do well with this requirement.  

I just ran into a case yesterday where darcs would have performed better
than CVS:

The client was reviewing some work on the 'beta' site, when a high
priority request came in with an issue on the production site, that
could be fixed quickly, but modified the same file as the
yet-to-be-approved beta site. 

With CVS, it seemed like it was going to be a pain to publish the one
change to the file without the others that had already been committed 
for review on the beta site. 

With darcs, I could have pushed just the one fix to the live site that I
wanted, with very little overhead.


More information about the darcs-users mailing list