On 2005-08-01, David Roundy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 06:48:37PM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>> >>>>> "Erik" == Erik Schnetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Erik> We could introduce a directory /deleted-patches and put a
>> Erik> copy of the patch there. This way it could be resurrected
>> Erik> with "darcs undelete".
>>
>> Don't we have plenty of options for keeping the patch in the
>> repository but not using it in the current workspace?
>
> Actually, this isn't such a bad idea. We could keep a patch bundle
> around. I think I'd rather avoid darcs undelete, though, if at all
> possible. We've just got too many un-commands already. On the other hand,
> if done right the uncommand naming scheme can be intuitive.
I agree with the idea that using another repo is a reasonable solution
to the "un-delete" concept. But let's stay focused on the naming issue,
which is somewhat separate.
I recall liking "unapply" from the last time this came up, because it is
consistent and technically correct, but obliterate and 'erase' are both
improvements over "unpull".
I don't like "drop".
Mark
--
http://mark.stosberg.com/
_______________________________________________
darcs-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.abridgegame.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
