On Fri, May 13, 2005 at 07:14:12AM +0200, Marnix Klooster wrote: > [Just using what Zooko/VMiklos brought up to get my word in] ... > Zooko also wrote (with different intention): > > >Another way to look at it is that you have no way to be sure when > >patches were actually created. > > ...and in which context they were created. So it would also be very > nice if the *original* context info of a patch could be extracted. (I > don't think it is in the current patch/repo format, is it?) > > Why? Well, just as one example, it allows for nice branch visualization > tools just like git has (git-viz et al.).
I can see that this could be useful, and would be nice, but it also could be quite massive. If you don't tag very often, the context can be quite large, and would be a pain to store. The only way I can see this being feasible would be to add to the context syntax a way of specifiying "this patch and its original context". If we did that, then under normal circumstances the context would remain approximately fixed in size, and it wouldn't be much overhead to include the original context with a patch. It would also have the advantage of shrinking the context included in patch bundles, which would be great. It's annoying having to tag just to reduce the size of the context. There is of course a question of backwards-compatibility--presumably this'd go in after the proposed RepoFormat changes to deal with that. Creation of the "original context" portion of patches would only happen if you enabled it in your repository, and older darcs would fail on accessing the repository, so everything would be fine. -- David Roundy http://www.darcs.net _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.abridgegame.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
