[darcs-users] Re: 'darcs annotate' output seems rather cryptic

David Roundy droundy at abridgegame.org
Sun Oct 3 11:09:29 UTC 2004


On Sat, Oct 02, 2004 at 04:49:14PM +0200, Nils Decker wrote:
> David Roundy <droundy at abridgegame.org> wrote:
> > But since darcs changes have long names, it is very hard to read.
...
> Why bother? The number of the patches can be used as short identifiers
> for patches. I saw a suggestion to take the id of a patch from the xml
> output to use it with --patch 'hash xxx'. This seems to be a terrible
> UI. Even the first characters of a patch name are longer and possibly
> not distinctive enough.
> These patch numbers could also be used to annotate the lines of a file.
> The first few columns show the number of the patch. This works well in
> many cvs viewers.

It would work, but then you'd still need to execute a second command to
find out which change patch #25 was.  I don't in principle object to the
idea of using patch numbers, but don't see great reasons to either.
Annotate is best dealt with by something like darcs.cgi, which will allow
you to easily go look at the actual changes.
-- 
David Roundy
http://www.abridgegame.org




More information about the darcs-users mailing list