On Aug 7, 2008, at 9:05 PM, Max Battcher wrote:
Simon Michael wrote:
+repositories, as converting each branch separately may result in
+corrupted repositories that cannot exchange patches. The
recommendation
change corrupted to "incompatible" or "unsynchronised" ? The repos
are
not corrupt, just not longer inter-pullable.
"Corrupted" is used in the ``darcs convert`` warning message, and I
figured David had good reason to use that strong of a term.
Piping up as a user who has experienced this: David isn't kidding
about corrupted. I did this mostly out of curiosity (tempting warning
message!) and in fact, bad things happened. The branches don't refuse
to exchange patches, but "things ain't right." I don't recall what
particular weirdness occurred.
Of course, each branch/repo that is converted separately isn't corrupt
in isolation, and perhaps that's the confusion with the original
language. But trading patches between these repos is bad. A really
strong warning seems reasonable here, because who knows what might
happen down the line if someone forgets that two particular repos (and
their own branches/copies) have patches that are not interchangeable..._______________________________________________
darcs-users mailing list
darcs-users@darcs.net
http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
