[darcs-users] Re: fixing conflicts in darcs

Karel Gardas kgardas at objectsecurity.com
Tue Nov 30 11:39:24 UTC 2004

On Tue, 30 Nov 2004, [ISO-8859-1] Erik Bågfors wrote:

> On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 07:36:21 +0100, Christoph Wegscheider
> <wegi at despammed.com> wrote:
> > Erik Bågfors <zindar at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > In cvs, since it's centralized I simply don't checkin/submit until I
> > > don't have any conflicts.  but in darcs I do my records on my local
> > > repository and then when I'm about to push/send I get my conflicts,
> > > but then they appear in a already "submitted (recorded)" patch. To
> > > solve the conflics I've been doing a new "record" and then my
> > > send/push.  The   problem with this is that I get patches that create
> > > conflicts, then patches that only fixes conflicts.  I would prefer to
> > > change the conflicting patch instead.

Why would you prefer to do so? I always wonder since this is a part of
project history and I usually wouldn't like to change project history even
we are talking about conflicts patches here. In fact, taught by Arch, I
consider `unrecord' a bad practice, especially when you always have a
possibility to correct source tree by next patch(es)... (I consider it bad
practise, since then you have to be very carefull for not `unrecord' patch
in your public repository)

Just IMHO,
Karel Gardas                  kgardas at objectsecurity.com
ObjectSecurity Ltd.           http://www.objectsecurity.com

More information about the darcs-users mailing list