On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 06:45:35PM -0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > I would update from CVS to darcs. Do my work in darcs. When I am ready > > to commit back to CVS, I tell tailor to sync. Tailor would first check > > to see if there had been any updates to CVS, and pull those, creating > > darcs patches for each changeset. Then immediately after committing > > each darcs patch to CVS, tailor would check to see if there had been any > > updates to CVS. There would be at least one (from the patch just > > committed), which would be pulled back. CVS would now be happy, and > > darcs would detect no changes, and would also be happy. Tailor could > > then continue with the next darcs patch to commit to CVS. > > Unfortunately, tailor would generate a patch from CVS (the most recent one) > where there is already a patch in darcs that does the same thing. So instead > of "darcs detecting no changes", darcs would try to merge the two patches that > have the identical effect. In the best case, this would result in a conflict > that you would have to manually merge. In the worst case, this would result > in > darcs going into its exponential complexity case and locking up anytime you > try > to use that repository again.
The scenario I describe is not theoretical. That is the process I manually take to keep my darcs and CVS repositories in sync. I know that it works, because I use it daily. What I would like is to be able to automatic this a little bit more. I would like to be able to record all my darcs patches at once, rather than having to darcs record, tailor to CVS, tailor from CVS, record next, and so on. -kolibrie _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.abridgegame.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
