[This is something that probably should be discussed on darcs-users, so I CC] [This is a comment to <http://bugs.darcs.net/issue244>, sorry for not quoting.]
I think the "problem" lies in using file names when asking darcs for changes. The logical entity in darcs history that we think of as a "file" can have different names at different points, so it's not always clear what file entity a file name refers to. I think there is no dispute about what part of the changes that Changes and Whatsnew shall report. The difference between recorded and unrecorded changes is very clear and simple. But the problem of informing darcs about what file entity we want to examine can sometimes be complicated, especially if old files have been removed and the old file names have been reused. In this particular case the question is: should a file entity be referable by its currently unrecorded name, in addition to all its previously recorded file names. It think it should, because I think it generates the least surprise to users. -- Tommy Pettersson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.abridgegame.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
