On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 01:31:28AM +0200, Tommy Pettersson wrote: > On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 05:25:26PM +0200, Albert Reiner wrote: > > - Tag the old version of C1, record the changes, use |send| to make a > > patchbundle that is then simply stored in the D branch, and unrecord > > the changes in C1. This seems nicer to me, but I am not sure it is > > a good idea. In particular, is the patchbundle produced by `darcs > > send` suitable for storing random patches in the long run, or is it > > liable to change? > > Even if the patchbundle format changes (I think I want to add the new > repo format information to it, for example), I hope newer versions of > darcs will still always understand old patchbundles. But then, thinking > some more, since darcs is going to be able to upgrade older patch > formats, old older patch formats _could_ be phased out gradually if one > wanted, and in that case recorded patchbundles could eventually rot out > of old age.
I hope never to remove support for at least reading older patch formats. We've already removed support for *commuting* "merger 0.9" patches, but I believe we can still read them--and they date from back when darcs had very few users. In any case, a patch bundle should bitrot at the same rate as an old repository. For this use case I'd usually follow Ganesh's suggestion, but if it's a small change sometimes I use the patch bundle approach (which is also a perfectly good idea). -- David Roundy http://www.darcs.net _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.abridgegame.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
