[darcs-users] Announcing darcs 1.0.4rc1

David Roundy droundy at darcs.net
Fri Oct 14 12:05:50 UTC 2005


On Fri, Oct 14, 2005 at 07:59:48PM +0930, Jonathon Mah wrote:
> I always like to see a count of changes. Could someone Haskell-y add  
> a switch to record, amend-record, revert (is that all of them?) to  
> make it always calculate the number of patches? I could then add it  
> to my defaults file.

Patches for this are welcome.  Also unrevert.

> >Obliterate. There have been much debate on darcs' mailing lists
> >about the naming of Unpull, and David Roundy has now made
> >Obliterate an alias for Unpull.
> 
> This fact (that they are aliases) should be made clear in the command  
> help. Assuming 'unpull' would be eventually phased out, its command  
> description could be changed to "Alias for obliterate", and  
> 'obliterate' can remain unchanged.

I'm not sure that unpull will be removed.  It is possible that unpull will
be extended to be "safe", perhaps by verifying that the patch being
unpulled is remotely available.

> >Put. There's a new command, Put, symmetric with Get, to put a
> >clone or tagged version of the current repo somewhere. The
> >command is still a bit inefficient, so avoid it on very large
> >repos. It's coded by Josef Svenningsson.
> 
> This is very handy too -- but why is it so much slower than 'get'?  
> I'd think that 'darcs push /parent/new' would be the same as '(cd / 
> parent ; darcs get repo new)'.

It could be implemented like that, but isn't.  I haven't had time or energy
to work on it, and Josef just got it working in the easiest way (basically
equivalent to a push).  Get is pretty complicated, because it tries to do
the best thing in many special cases.  Making put as efficient will require
a similar amount of work--probably more work, since get is at least always
*creating* a local repository, while put may be creating either a local or
remote repository (but the source is always local).

> The current usage for this command is:
> Usage: darcs put [OPTION]... <REPOSITORY>
> 
> From that it is not clear that <REPOSITORY> is the location of a  
> _new_ repository. Something like <NEW REPOSITORY> would make it more  
> evident.

Done.
-- 
David Roundy
http://www.darcs.net




More information about the darcs-users mailing list