Eric Kow <[email protected]> writes: > - we /could/ perhaps implement --no-working-directory, which is > conceptually cleaner for push-only repositories, in my opinion > http://bugs.darcs.net/issue431
+1 I've always been too scared to use --no-pristine-tree in case I forgot to disable commands, and because the working tree was still there so it wasn't obvious that I was looking at a "don't make edits!!" repo. I could disable commands in _darcs/prefs/defaults, but I would probably come back in six months and think "which idiot disabled all these commands? I'll enable them again!" I've experienced hg and bzr "no working copy" repositories before, and I think it's more obvious to spot that you shouldn't be making edits in them -- because you can't! :-) BTW, Darcs also wins over hg and bzr in this case, because _darcs is visible with ls. Because hg and bzr hide their metadata, I have *often* become confused about what all these stupid "empty" directories are doing, and only been saved because I ran "rmdir" instead of "rm -rf". I think --no-working-tree should also set _darcs/prefs/defaults to disable commands that operate on the working tree, such as whatsnew and record. > - on the other hand, for hashed repositories --no-working-directory > would be less transparent than a hypothetical --no-pristine-tree, > because of our internal gobbledegooky filenames... we would have > to do something like darcs show contents and darcs show files to > retrieve files, yuck :-( This isn't an issue specific to working-treeless repos. Any tool that wants to know what *Darcs* thinks is in the repo should be using the show commands, not just catting whatever happens to be in the working directory. Cf. the arguments for/against the --hashed format. _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
