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