[darcs-users] darcs patch: Resolve issue1588: make--dont-allow-conflicts filter ...

Dan Pascu dan at ag-projects.com
Wed Oct 7 14:25:27 UTC 2009


On 5 Oct 2009, at 22:51, Ganesh Sittampalam wrote:
>> If they are mutually exclusive, I assume that the program will  
>> decide what option to use before it starts to do anything. So if I  
>> have skip-conflicts in the defaults file but I give --dont-allow- 
>> conflicts on the command line, then indeed I expect that skip- 
>> conflicts (specified in the defaults) is completely suppressed and  
>> ignored.
>
> Right, and I am saying that this behaviour, while straightforward to  
> implement, might be rather confusing.

Here is where we view things differently. I find it straight forward  
to see them as mutually exclusive, because then I know that the last  
one specified is the one that has an effect. Otherwise I would have to  
keep in mind the relations between them as well as what options was  
set in every place (internal defaults, global and local defaults file  
and command line) and to mentally compute the result of their  
combination. This is hardly something I want to do or find it to be  
simple/intuitive.

>> I feel like I'm missing something here.
>
> The problem is not with the implementation, but with the user  
> confusion that might result from the addition of --dont-allow- 
> conflicts causing conflicting patches to be offered in interactive  
> selection when they weren't previously.

But this I do not understand. Why do you say that if I specify --dont- 
allow-conflicts on the command line and the options are mutually  
exclusive, so --dont-allow-conflicts actually wins and discards  
whatever else default is in the defaults file, still I get conflicting  
patches being offered?

> But perhaps the fact that I'm finding it so hard to get across what  
> I mean shows that my preferred behaviour is actually the more  
> confusing one.


That may be, because honestly every time you explained more of your  
point of view, it got more confusing for me. Even now, I cannot really  
say that I entirely understood your point of view.

--
Dan





More information about the darcs-users mailing list