[darcs-users] cheap in-repo local branches (just needs implementation)

Grant Husbands darcsusers at grant.x43.net
Fri Jul 24 23:39:57 UTC 2009

Max Battcher <me at worldmaker.net> wrote:
> It wouldn't need to look up "parent-inventories" because the Hash: line is
> the file/patch object name.

Correction: The patches are insufficient as the tag patches also do
not contain hashes. As I mentioned, though, parent inventories (which
already exist) give you what you need.

> the error provided ("Can't find patch x in
> get_extra") is *precisely* the same that you see in any other lazy patch
> lookup;

Note: It's the same error message with a different cause. In one case,
Darcs can't find a known file and in the other it doesn't even know
the name of the file.

> I am happy with existing branch semantics.

I am not. A repository I work with has more than a hundred branches,
each of which takes up at least 40MB. I had not, before now, pushed
hard for branches because I believed that Darcs had more important
things to resolve. If the Darcs community is to gain branching,
though, I would prefer it be done in an extensible and idiomatic way,
especially given that the hashed storage seems to make it relatively

> You have found one small complication in my proposal (that existing context
> files wouldn't work for push/pull/...)

I've had pointed out to me that we're not likely to make useful
progress, arguing in this fashion. So, apart from offering the above
notes and extra information, I will take a couple of days to study the
issues more closely before replying on the more contentious proposal
vs proposal issue.


More information about the darcs-users mailing list