On 2006-08-21, Tommy Pettersson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, I does make darcs unusable in certain situations. Let's
> call it a missdesign. (A very unfortunate missdesign, since it
> jumps up from nowhere and bites you unexpectedly, unless you
> understand it very well and carefully avoid it from the
> beginning.) A bunch of smart people are trying to find a
> solution, and as far as I understand, there has recently been
> some optimism. It's too early to hold your breath yet, though.
> Until then there's only one thing to do, or rather not do; don't
> use darcs in this particular way.
I was thinking that perhaps delete should be handled similarly to a
rename as a file with a special name:
foo.txt -> foo.txt-DELETED:patch-id
or something like that. Now, darcs simply would not display this file
unless an applied patch has changed the file, in which case it could be
undeleted by a special undelete operation, or by simply moving the file.
As far as I know, moves have no such merger problems as the current
delete.
--
Tuomo
_______________________________________________
darcs-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.abridgegame.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
