[darcs-users] darcs patch theory

David Roundy droundy at darcs.net
Mon Sep 8 15:29:49 UTC 2008


On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 11:25 AM, Ian Lynagh <igloo at earth.li> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 10:07:29AM -0400, David Roundy wrote:
>>
>> It might be worth mentioning in your documentation that while the
>> internals are similar to darcs 2, the semantics that you're
>> implementing is the semantics of darcs 1.
>
> Are you referring to not treating duplicate patches specially?

That is an interesting way to describe it, but yes, that is the
difference between darcs 1 and darcs 2.

>> That would be more honest than to say that your theory is similar to
>> that of darcs 2.
>
> I'm not deliberately trying to be dishonest  :-)

I know, but by describing your theory as being similar to darcs 2,
that is the effect.  It's much more similar to darcs 1.  The
implementation is more similar to darcs 2, but the semantics are what
is important to users--and to developers.  No one particularly cares
what the patch looks like on its inside, or whether you've chosen to
call your conflict patches "conflictors" rather than "mergers".

David


More information about the darcs-users mailing list