On Friday 05 December 2008, Josef Svenningsson wrote: > On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 9:26 AM, Eric Kow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 05, 2008 at 00:10:42 -0800, Trent W. Buck wrote: > >> I propose that the "darcs put" command be hidden until it becomes as > >> efficient as "darcs get". That means it is not listed in "darcs > >> help" or in the user manual. > > > > I have no objections. Anybody else? > > I object. > > I was the one implementing the infamous put command and the reason > that I did it is that it provides for a use case which isn't possible > with the other darcs commands afaik (or at least very cumbersome). It > goes like this. I have the following setup: a laptop which I use quite > a lot for hacking and a server which provides reliable storage and > possibility to publish repositories on the web. Now, it's very common > that I create a repository on my laptop when I start hacking on a > project. After the initial bit of hacking I want to put this > repository on the server. Doing this with the get command from the > server is highly inconvenient for two reasons. First of all my laptop > doesn't have a fixed ip address so I would have to look it up. > Secondly I would have to be able to log in on my laptop via ssh or > have a small webserver installed to be able to publish the patches to > the server. On linux this is fine since sshd is fairly standard. On > Windows otoh this is very inconvenient. So I see the put command as > filling a very important niche. Note also that this use case doesn't > require put to be that efficient. It's only a very small initial repo > that is transfered with put and so its inefficiencies are bearable, at > least that's my experience. > > When I implemented put I was fully aware of that it was inefficient. > My plan was to have a working command quickly and then optimize it. > Unfortunately I ran completely out of energy before having completed > the optimizations. I was kind of hoping that someone else would take > care of that but it seems that not sufficiently many people use the > put command to be bothered by its inefficiencies. > > Despite its warts I think put should stay and remain documented. It > fills a small but important niche. But feel free to document the > warts.
I agree. I have this use case as well and I consider it important. -- Dan _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list darcs-users@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
