>> darcs batch take-lock
>> darcs batch release-lock
> I wonder if we could combine these two together? Or could we at least make
> it so that release-lock can only release a lock taken by take-lock?
You're right; an additional issue is potentially holding the lock for
extended periods of time.
I think the solution is to switch to a ``store conditional'' type of
approach. Darcs whatsnew would provide an opaque token uniquely
identifying the current state of the repo (using either a hash or the
last modification date). Darcs batch record would take this token as
an argument, and fail if the current state of the repo doesn't match
the token.
Users would have to deal with having their commit fail with
``repository was modified in the meantime'' if they spend too much
time choosing patches, but that's something they're used to if they
ever used a wiki.
> I'd rather add a numbering option to ordinary whatsnew...
Okay.
> I'd rather have a --lock flag to record and improved scriptability. We've
> already got the record --pipe mode.
darcs record --if-unmodified-since token
> Apart from the above concerns, I agree. What we really need in this arena
> is someone working on a GUI and someone working on darcs who are working
> together.
Yes. And as noted in my previous message, if the latter is to be me,
the former must be working on a free OS.
Juliusz
_______________________________________________
darcs-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.abridgegame.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
