[darcs-users] 'submitted' branch

Max Battcher me at worldmaker.net
Tue Sep 14 20:26:46 UTC 2010

On 9/13/2010 10:06, Florent Becker wrote:
>>   It
>> seems like a 'darcs pull --bundle<foo.dpatch>  <some repo>' command
>> would be nice here. It would take the patch names from foo.dpatch, but
>> ignore the contents, and pull the patches from<some repo>  instead.
> I think a more general way to do that would be to have an "in" matcher
> that works with bundles and repos, allowing you to do 'darcs pull
> --match "in<foo.dpatch>"<some repo>'. (For instance, 'darcs rollback
> --match "not in<upstream>"<my repo>' is a tool i often miss.) See
> http://bugs.darcs.net/issue1870.

Isn't this, conceptually, a "simple" refinement/expansion of the 
existing --intersection? The key right now being that --intersection 
doesn't currently work with contexts or dpatches, and only works with 
one or more repositories... Also, it probably would be useful to provide 
intersection in more/all cases applicable to matching, so "in" does 
sound like a reasonable matcher name.

It's come up before that it would be useful to audit darcs commands and 
make sure that all commands can interact with any sort of 
"repository-like thing" they encounter, whether that is a full 
repository, an intentionally abbreviated repository (say, just the 
inventory files, for instance), a context file, a dpatch, or what have 
you, to the best ability they can.

(That is, one might reasonably consider ``darcs pull 
some/repo/_darcs/inventories/some_special_inventory``, which was one 
possible way of offering parts an in-repo branching, that has been 
mentioned previously. Certainly from a user perspective, even, ``darcs 
pull some.dpatch`` sounds perfectly reasonable, even if it is "just a 
shortcut" for ``darcs apply some.dpatch``.)

--Max Battcher--

More information about the darcs-users mailing list