On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 05:21:18PM -0700, Eric Kow wrote:
> Fri Sep 26 00:58:01 BST 2008  Eric Kow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>   * Resolve issue1102: Ignore future 'junk' fields in patch logs.
>   
>   This patch provides some forward-compatibility with a feature that is
>   planned for a future release of darcs.
>   
>   On 2008-09-17 David submitted the following patch
>     resolve issue27: add junk to patch identifiers.
>   which will not be included the darcs 2.1.0 feature-freeze.  The patch
>   in question adds some extra 'junk' to the patch log in order to minimise
>   the risk of a patch-id collision.
>   
>   This patch was obtained by unrecording David's patch and reverting the
>   parts that generate the junk, leaving behind only the parts that hide
>   the junk from view.
> 
> Fri Sep 26 00:59:36 BST 2008  Eric Kow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>   * Fix conflict between issue27 and issue1102 patches.

Why not simply use rollback? This is indeed what it's designed for,
and it works perfectly for this purpose.

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

Reply via email to