[darcs-users] Re: [darcs #473] "delete": It should do what you think it means

[David Roundy]

On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 06:48:37PM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> >>>>> "Erik" == Erik Schnetter <schnetter at aei.mpg.de> writes:
> Erik> We could introduce a directory /deleted-patches and put a
> Erik> copy of the patch there.  This way it could be resurrected
> Erik> with "darcs undelete".
> 
> Don't we have plenty of options for keeping the patch in the
> repository but not using it in the current workspace?

Actually, this isn't such a bad idea.  We could keep a patch bundle
around.  I think I'd rather avoid darcs undelete, though, if at all
possible.  We've just got too many un-commands already.  On the other hand,
if done right the uncommand naming scheme can be intuitive.

I'm not sure I'd enjoy writing the selection interface for undelete.  There
would tend to accumulate patch bundles there with bizarre dependencies.
Perhaps it would be better to handle it like we do unrevert, where we only
allow you to unrevert the most recent revert.  That would keep the
interface relatively simple.  We could store patch bundles for older
deletes, so humans could always go in an pick up the pieces.

If we had this safety mechanism, then "drop" might not be a bad name.
-- 
David Roundy
http://www.darcs.net