[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The trouble is that, unless I misunderstand, darcs simply does not support
this scenario, at least not for projects as big as GHC. Step 4 doesn't
work, and there is no viable work-around.
One of us must be misunderstanding something, because I do things like this all
the time. The threat of a lockup is a hassle, but it doesn't strike that often
and it can be worked around.
Sometimes you don't get a lockup, you get a crash (see some of the bug reports
in the darcs bug tracker that Simon or I have submitted, for example). On
branches with more than just a few small changes, it's been our experience that
a merge is very likely to either crash or lock up.
There's no good workaround. To perform the merge you essentially have to
re-record all the patches, starting from the first patch that causes a lockup or
crash, on a fresh head repo. This is possible (we've done it several times now,
and are getting quite good at it), but it's not a workaround in general because
the old branch repo is now defunct; any developer that was using the old branch
has to start using the new merged repo. Furthermore it's a very time-consuming
workaround - the last branch I merged in this way took me nearly a day to sort
out, and it was just a branch that I'd been developing on alone.
I don't want all this to sound like criticism, but I do feel we need to counter
the perceived wisdom that the bug doesn't strike all that often. For the GHC
project, it seems to strike whenever we try to merge any non-trivial branch.
Cheers,
Simon
_______________________________________________
darcs-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
