[darcs-users] Option to set where darcs push searches remote darcs command

[David Roundy]

On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 03:37:39PM +0100, Erik Schnetter wrote:
> I append a patch to darcs that implements an option
> "--executable-location".

I'm a little concerned that this flag will unnecesarily clutter up the
interface.  What do other people think on this? I'm hesitant to add a flag
to handle a (possibly rare?) circumstance in which there might be other
workarounds.  I'm not strongly opposed, but I'm hesitant to add flags
without some discussion.  It's not nearly so serious as adding new
commands, but still, it's best to avoid unnecessary flags.

Anyhow, I think I'll wait another week, and if noone objects, I'll assume
this change meets with general darcs-devel approval.

And perhaps the flag should be --remote-darcs-location, or
--remote-executable-location?

> hunk ./Push.lhs 89
> +      darcs_cmd = maybe "darcs" id $ exec_loc opts

> hunk ./Push.lhs 152
> +exec_loc :: [DarcsFlag] -> Maybe String
> +exec_loc (ExecutableLocation darcs_cmd:_) = Just darcs_cmd
> +exec_loc (_:fs) = exec_loc fs
> +exec_loc [] = Nothing

I think it would be easier to understand if we had

exec_loc :: [DarcsFlag] -> String

and exec_loc itself returned "darcs" if there's no flag.
-- 
David Roundy
http://www.darcs.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/darcs-users/attachments/20050307/d08fded5/attachment.pgp