[darcs-users] post-hoc move

[Hamish Allan]

On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn<zooko at zooko.com> wrote:

> I'm not sure about your idea of "darcs mv" figuring out that the file had
> already been mv'ed.  That sounds like the kind of thing that sometimes leads
> me to further confusion because it is "too clever" and it becomes hard for
> me to figure out what the tool may or may not have done.

Personally, I don't think "darcs move" should do the actual physical
move at all. "darcs add" doesn't physically create a file; "darcs
remove" doesn't physically delete one. Likewise, "darcs move" should
simply mean "change your concept of what this file is called".

> What?  I'm still not understand what's going on there.  If you do 'darcs
> revert' and tell it to revert all of the relevant changes (i.e. any rm's,
> add's, hunks, or mv's for those two filenames), then it should be right back
> where you started.  Why doesn't that work for you?

It didn't offer me all the changes I thought it would, and some of the
ones I asked to be reverted it skipped.

> You can give filenames like "darcs revert $FILE1 $FILE2" and then it will
> prompt you only for changes which affect the files in question (which means
> there should only be four changes -- an rm, a hunk for the first file and an
> add and a hunk for the second filename.

That is helpful, thank you. Still nowhere near as helpful, to my mind,
as it would be if darcs simply decoupled the physical and logical move
altogether.

Thanks,
Hamish