On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 19:36:18 -0400, David Roundy wrote: > This could be controversial, so I'll wait a bit for comments. It's > also a tiny change, so it's not hard to revert... > > If you can ping me on this, it's probably something that can just go > in. Although maybe we should just change the default.
I initially wanted to change the default, but then I got scared off because I realised it's not just flipping a switch, but rewriting some of the internal code to change its assumptions about what happens when there are no relevant opts. If you are willing to wade in and make this change, and you think we can do it pretty safely, I am willing for the upcoming release to be called darcs 2.1. Otherwise, I was just trying to be prudent :-) (I guess what I would do is tag my next pre-release 2.1.0pre2) One very minor kink is that I had talked about 2.1 as being a performance-enhanced darcs, but that will just have to be a future 2.1.x or 2.2 Thanks! -- Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow> PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9
pgpuT4p2EyqfC.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
