[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