[darcs-users] Re: Why Bitkeeper still wins

Karel Gardas kgardas at objectsecurity.com
Wed Mar 23 07:02:17 UTC 2005


On Wed, 23 Mar 2005, Mark Stosberg wrote:

> On 2005-03-22, David Brown <darcs at davidb.org> wrote:
> >>> and bazaar-ng ( http://www.bazaar-ng.org ).
> >>
> >> It was my understanding that it's just Arch without the silly naming
> >> conventions.
> >
> > That's bazaar.  Bazaar-ng is completely new code, all written in python.
>
> And they are following darcs some:
>  http://www.bazaar-ng.org/doc/darcs.html
>
> They includes some darcs-like features, including:
>   - one top level .bzr directory
>   - 'pull'
>   - 'send'
>
> It does seem to do things a little oddly. though. In the 'merge'
> command:
>  http://www.bazaar-ng.org/doc/cmdref.html#merge
>
> "Merge changes in from another branch, and leave them uncommitted in this tree";
>
> "Before a merge is committed, it may be reversed with the revert command." (huh?)

This is arch-like design. Every merge command (update/replay/star-merge)
is working on top of working directory and then you have to commit the
changes to your archive. This way you can group patches and "assign" them
different log.  Usuall practice is to use log-for-merge command to
generate log for merge commmit.

> The darcs workflow makes more sense to me here: pull is interactive in
> the first place, and you can unpull/unapply/drop patches later if you
> don't want them.

The darcs workflow follows KISS principle which is simply great! :-)

Karel
--
Karel Gardas                  kgardas at objectsecurity.com
ObjectSecurity Ltd.           http://www.objectsecurity.com





More information about the darcs-users mailing list