[darcs-users] How to develop on a (GHC) branch with darcs
Stephen J. Turnbull
stephen at xemacs.org
Fri Dec 10 09:31:48 UTC 2010
n.b. GHC Users cut because it doesn't know me and I don't have time to
introduce myself. :-)
Ganesh Sittampalam writes:
> darcs rebase is essentially about giving up on the recombinant patching
> because that's not working out for whatever reason. It's primarily
> intended as an alternative to manually reapplying patches to new branches
OK. I'm still not sure it's a good name. Although git rebase is
deprecated for certain use cases by everybody, and considered criminal
in any usage by a few, nevertheless it's an operation that many people
use very frequently. Such a mode of operation is an alternative to
patch queues (quilt, stacked git, Mercurial queues, bzr pipelines).
I get the impression that darcs rebase is not intended to be used that
way. If so, the command name might want to be different. It's a
tough call; if the implementation is basically the same, some people
will complain "it works (implementation) just like git rebase, why
don't you just call it 'rebase'?" OTOH, if the workflow differs,
other people will complain, "it doesn't work (workflow) at all like
git rebase; why does darcs suck so much?" We don't need that!
Mercurial calls its rebase extension "transplant"; bzr's is "rewrite"
(but it provides a command named "rebase", IIRC). Another possibility
for the darcs command would be "reorder", I think (what does "base"
mean in Darcs, anyway?)
Simon M, if you're listening, what do you think?
More information about the darcs-users