[darcs-users] How to develop on a (GHC) branch with darcs

Stephen J. Turnbull stephen at xemacs.org
Sun Dec 12 12:03:29 UTC 2010

Ganesh Sittampalam writes:

 > The basic behaviour will be somewhat similar, modulo the fact that we're 
 > working with trees rather than patches, and you ought to be able to use it 
 > for all the things you would use git rebase for. The main difference would 
 > be that there are preferred alternatives in darcs for many of those 
 > things, at least in the cases where they work out well. So to some extent 
 > this may "just" be a matter of documentation.

Yeah, it's those quote marks I'm worried about.  SMO, uh, D, is it? :-)

 > > 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?)
 > In essence the "base" of a patch would be its dependencies.

I was afraid you'd say that.  I find that hard to think about,and I
like thinking about these things ....

 > I think "reorder" doesn't really describe what the command will do and 
 > would lead to confusion with reordering patches by commutation. I did 
 > originally intend to call it "transplant" but then switch to rebase for 
 > consistency with git.


More information about the darcs-users mailing list