[darcs-users] Re: Where Arch is going

John Meacham john at repetae.net
Tue Jun 7 22:16:48 UTC 2005


On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 07:37:22PM +0000, John Goerzen wrote:
> On 2005-06-07, David Roundy <droundy at abridgegame.org> wrote:
> > As others have said, it's nice to have a clean history.  A dirty history is
> > all right when it's just you working on the project, but "never mind"
> > patches lead to conflicts with other developers.  I agree that if you fix a
> > bug then realize the bugfix is wrong, probably you shouldn't amend-record
> > that patch.  But if you add a new feature, but forget to darcs add the
> > relevant file, it makes perfect sense to amend-record the patch.
> >
> > I think of darcs more as a means of communication than a means of storing
> > history, and clean patches make it much easier to read and review changes.
> 
> On the other hand, as we've already established, all of this stuff
> breaks if others are pulling your repo... so I don't think it actually
> is friendlier to others.
> 
> Anyway, thanks to all for the insight.  I think I'll just continue not
> using these commands :-)

Then you are going to miss out :) I say to darcs "You had me at
amend-record".

Although, I really like how darcs is embarasment-free. if you screw up,
you can fix it in your own repo before sending out a patch, you can pull
and realize something doesn't build because you made a silly mistake
(like forgetting a file) and amend-record it before you push the patch
upstream. It makes for much more readable and relevant changelogs. It is
one of the main things that buged me about arch, it was hard to hide
irrelevant details about your development progress, I mean, no one cares
whether I was working on my laptop or my main system but it ends up in
the logs... darcs doesn't make you fight the tool. 

Sorry for the pro-darcs rambling. It's just nice isall.

        John

-- 
John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈ 




More information about the darcs-users mailing list