[darcs-users] New argument for symlink support

Jason Dagit dagit at codersbase.com
Wed Dec 2 07:25:25 UTC 2009

On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 11:12 PM, Max Battcher <me at worldmaker.net> wrote:

> Petr Rockai wrote:
>> Jason Dagit <dagit at codersbase.com> writes:
>>> Can someone workout the rules for commuting symlink patches?  I think
>>> treating
>>> them as files which contain a path to where they point is a reasonable
>>> way to
>>> model them.
>> >
>> just a little (side)note: please don't do the mistake of introducing a
>> new patch type for something that is adequately served by addfile and
>> hunk patches. At least unless you want to repeat the setpref
>> debacle. (It may be that addfile will need substituting, but definitely
>> be wary of hunks.) Oh, and keep in mind that if we add a new patch type,
>> we are making an incompatible darcs repository format (akin to the
>> darcs-2 incompatibility, although arguably less severe).
> Somewhat related to that point: if darcs were to add symlink
> (and/or hardlink?) tracking support the point in time where I think that
> makes the most sense is alongside the tokenization of file names proposed as
> a possibility on the roadmap.

Queuing up several repository format changes and making them all "go live"
at once seems reasonable.  Call it darcs-3 format if it makes you happier :)

But, I think the discussion of tokenization and if/which things should be
queued is probably something that should be agreed up and decided outside of
a feature request for symlinks.  Eg., make a feature request in round up (if
there isn't already) hold a public discussion on the mailing list and
involve the release manager.  It's a good discussion to have, but let's try
to do it in a different thread, please.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/darcs-users/attachments/20091201/0700c9b2/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the darcs-users mailing list