On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 5:01 PM, Jason Dagit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 11:38 AM, David Roundy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 1:22 PM, Eric Kow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I don't see that we've yet added any metadata, and don't see any >> reason to do so. I think this is a red herring, and we should wait >> until there's a feature that would benefit from this. Or at least we >> should ask whether there is some sort of hypothetical feature that it >> would benefit. In the absence of any of those, I'd say we've got what >> we want. > > Actually, people propose various per-patch features from time to time. > Allowing user-defined attributes on patches (metadata) would be a nice > pre-factor that allows us to address many of these concerns. Take for > instance the proposal to have local-only patches. These patches could have > metedata like: > X-Local-Only: True
Users are already welcome to add whatever data they like to their patch comments. I consider the new feature that they can add have that data hidden. I don't see any reason why darcs should have anything to do with organizing this user data. As far as the local-only feature, the users who want this seem to not want to have to define at patch-record-time which data is local-only. Otherwise I presume they'd be content with darcs push --match, which is what your new feature would empower. David _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
