[darcs-users] Why Bitkeeper still wins [was: Bitkeeper and Eclipse...]

Sean Perry shaleh at speakeasy.net
Sun Mar 20 20:30:09 UTC 2005


Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
>>Even if you can not use bk, you can read their docs. (-:
> 
> 
> I have, but it's just not the same thing as being able to play with a
> live piece of software.  Your description is just what we need.
> 
> 
>>We had a scripted system which [...]
> 
> 
> If I'm following your description: you need pre-commit and post-commit
> hooks, with the post-commit hook being able to find out if there was a
> merge conflict.  Anything I'm missing?
>

pre script must be able to make decisions and prevent the action from 
finishing. post must be able to discover that something bad happened and 
scream about it. *OR* there could be a post-if-error and a post-commit.

> 
>>darcs *MUST* have a way to clean out the revision tree. There should
>>be a way to get rid of 4 year old garbage. 
> 
> 
> Yes, that is a serious weakness in Darcs: there's currently no way to
> do what Arch calls ``log pruning''.  Doing that in Darcs without
> breaking future merges would require some additional metadata -- some
> notion of ``patch equivalence''.  (I guess David would speak of a
> congruence over the patch algebra, but ``additional metadata'' will do
> for now ;-)
> 
> 

I would be happy if darcs had a way to declare a file/directory *really* 
gone. No need to keep some of the dead items around. A nice feature 
would be "this darcs tree has revision from current back to date N". If 
I need revision info be date N, I could look at a tree stored on tape or 
something especially for this purpose.




More information about the darcs-users mailing list