[darcs-users] unrecord --matches and --patches (was: Re: Feature Request: darcs unrecord --all)

[David Roundy]

On Sat, Feb 26, 2005 at 02:24:36AM +0000, Jamie Webb wrote:
> How about changing the regular behaviour to prompt the same way as
> push and pull? I.e. one has to respond to [ynWvxqadjk?] for each
> matching patch (or all of them if no filter is supplied), and so to
> get the current behaviour would hit 'yd'. The same applies to unpull.
> That would be both more consistent and more flexible. Probably to
> protect against accidental hitting of 'a' (or --all), unpull and
> unrecord should then have the extra confirmation that revert has (and
> I think it would be nice if revert also summarised the changes to be
> made as part of that prompt).

Yes, this definitely sounds like the way to go, and will provide a much
more consistent (and powerful) interface.  I've disliked the
unpull/unrecord interface for a long time, but somehow it never occurred to
me to use the same interface as pull!

I believe if we do this, we can almost eliminate entirely the
with_selected_patch_from_repo interface routine (which is the one used in
unpull, etc).  This'll be good, because that interface isn't as nice in a
number of ways as the other one (which allows you to use 'j' and 'k' to
browse the options, for example.

The catch is that we'd still have the amend-record and rollback commands
which need to select a single patch (for good reasons).  :( Oh well.

On the whole, I don't think that this change should be too hard.  I don't
expect I'll start on it right now, so if someone else wants to give it a
shot, that would be great.  In anycase, someone (Jamie?) could file a bug
on it.

Printing a summary on revert also sounds like a good idea, so filing a bug
on that would also be nice.  (I'm trying to concentrate on the conflictor
code at the moment... which is *almost* passing tests...)
-- 
David Roundy
http://www.darcs.net