[darcs-users] Ignoring patches

[Daniel Burrows]

On Wednesday 04 May 2005 03:08 am, Thomas Zander wrote:
> The huge problem I see is that any solution that excludes patches will
> eventually get you into trouble if you get new patches that depend on the
> patch you don't want to push.  You would have to unpull/unrecord the new
> patch to remove the Local patch and fix the problem.  That is; when you
> eventually discover that some patches are not being pushed while you expect
> them to. Very much not what you want.

  Actually, that already happens -- I eventually had to push one patch like 
this out, because some completely unrelated stuff had developed a dependency 
on it.  I figured that out when I noticed that several patches were 
mysteriously not getting pushed out.

  Anyway, would it be possible to have "record" warn you and/or abort if your 
changes would depend on a quarantined patch?  I wouldn't mind occasionally 
having to back out the patch, record without it, and then re-create it.

> Next to that; if you 'darc get' from a repository with a patch you want to 
> ignore that patch WILL be copied which does not make it local anymore.

  Assuming that 'darcs get' can't be modified to do the same thing, I think 
this would be OK for the use cases I can imagine.

  Daniel

-- 
/------------------- Daniel Burrows <dburrows at debian.org> ------------------\
|                  DROP THE SCYTHE AND TURN AROUND SLOWLY.                  |
|                    -- Terry Pratchett, "Reaper Man"                       |
\---------------- The Turtle Moves! -- http://www.lspace.org ---------------/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/darcs-users/attachments/20050504/32c18b0c/attachment.pgp