[darcs-users] darcs patch: add "parallel pairs" (and 6 more)

Nicolas Pouillard nicolas.pouillard at gmail.com
Sat Sep 19 12:04:21 UTC 2009


Excerpts from Ganesh Sittampalam's message of Sat Sep 19 13:47:49 +0200 2009:
> On Sat, 19 Sep 2009, Nicolas Pouillard wrote:
> 
> > Excerpts from Kamil Dworakowski's message of Sat Sep 19 11:23:30 +0200 2009:
> >> On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 10:06 AM, Nicolas Pouillard
> >> <nicolas.pouillard at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Excerpts from Ganesh Sittampalam's message of Sat Sep 19 01:18:00 +0200 2009:
> >>>> On Fri, 18 Sep 2009, Nicolas Pouillard wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I have a question about the hunk editing feature.
> >>>>> Does it leave the pristine tree as is (like git), or not?
> >>>>
> >>>> Once you've edited a hunk, you can choose whether or not to record 
> >>>> the resulting fragments. If you don't record any of them then you'll 
> >>>> be back where you started - the edited hunk won't be offered next 
> >>>> time. So for the feature to be any use you'd have to record something 
> >>>> and thus change pristine.
> >>>
> >>> I think, I wasn't clear enough: the git edit-hunk feature enables you 
> >>> commit an edited hunk without changing the pristine directory 
> >>> accordingly. That is you end up with an unrecorded change.
> >>>
> >>> I don't know what semantics is the most useful, maybe both are useful. 
> >>> In fact I was expecting the pristine to be updated the first time I 
> >>> used the git feature.
> >>
> >> I know this feature in git. I think you mean "working dir" not the 
> >> pristine. The pristine are the files created by the sum of patches you 
> >> have, in other words this is the recorded state of the repository. 
> >> Editing a hunk in git does not change the working dir.
> >
> > Oh yes my bad, I completely meant "working dir" instead of pristine.
> 
> OK, so record/amend-record never cause the working dir to change, so 
> neither does editing a hunk during those commands, which are currently the 
> only places it is enabled. However, you can use darcs revert after you've 
> recorded some fragments of the edited hunk, to revert the others.

OK.

> I could in theory enable edit hunk for darcs revert (and perhaps darcs 
> unrevert too), but I don't know what it buys you over just editing the 
> file directly.

Hum right, it could be useful in revert as well.

-- 
Nicolas Pouillard
http://nicolaspouillard.fr


More information about the darcs-users mailing list