[Jamie Webb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Thu, 2 Feb 2006 19:49:58 +0000]: > But remember that domains are essentially repo-local (It just happens > that's you'd probably version-control the domains file). That would > mean that 'replace' could affect a different set of files in each > repo! Worse, that would imply that it had different dependencies in > each repo. I don't think it works.
It is not clear to me that there would be this kind of problem if domains are defined in terms of patches: after all, the patches are supposed to be unique. I haven't thought about the consequences of patch permutations, though. In this case, the domainfile would simply be a convenient way of naming often used domains; the patch would instead record the replacement domain in terms of the patches that define the domain. Anyway, the proposed flavor of domains simply seems not very thoroughly thought out to me, and seems to be too narrowly focused on an issue that should not exist at all in proper use of darcs: as far as I understand, poison patches only arise because of lumping together what should be different repos. A policy of "one repo per domain" is sufficient to solve this issue, I think. But as long as current behavior does not change at all without user intervention (like creation of a domainfile), I don't really care if it is implemented. It just seems a waste of effort to me. Regards, Albert. _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.abridgegame.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
