Excerpts from Stephen J. Turnbull's message of Fri Aug 08 17:38:49 +0200 2008:
> Alex Lance writes:
> 
>  > If the unpull command is to continue its life in darcs then yes that
>  > behaviour of making it safe, so that you don't accidentally "unpull" i.e.
>  > delete, your single copy of a local patch, appears to be desirable
>  > functionality.
> 
> No, this is *undesirable* functionality.  The point of obliterate is
> indeed to delete your single copy of a local patch (for unlikely but
> possible example, under a court order) without otherwise harming your
> repository.  More likely, people just like to live dangerously, and
> they mostly use it in a fairly safe fashion as a generalized
> amend-record.
> 
> If you want to "undo" but keep the record of a patch, `darcs rollback'
> will do the trick, albeit at the cost of including the rollback patch
> in history.
> 
>  > - would allow you to nuke the text "(UNSAFE!)" from the documentation :)
> 
> But then somebody will request the addition of a true (ie, unsafe)
> obliterate command.  Anyway, it is, after all, somewhat safer than
> "rm _darcs/patches/...".

Unless if a --force option is provided. 

-- 
Nicolas Pouillard aka Ertai

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
darcs-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users

Reply via email to