> cd foo # yep, that's foo/foo Well, it certainly confused me! I would say disallow, or at least warn. I'm now doubting whether I am in a darcs-2 repository after all, since I edited _darcs/format manually. I suppose I will need to convert and push again.
I suppose another countermeasure that would have prevented this mess is if _darcs/format was in some kind of resistant-to-editing binary format. I don't really like either of these ideas because they seem like make-work though. After some reflection, I think the most intuitive thing to do might be to make convert a flag to darcs get, like darcs get --converto-to-darcs-2 The word "convert" followed by that elaborate warning message confused me into thinking it was doing something destructive to the directory. > I'll leave it up to darcs-users to decide if we should allow that, or if > the potential to confuse users is too great On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 11:48 PM, Eric Kow <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 18:53:46 -0800, Thomas Hartman wrote: >> > "darcs convert then push" is raising warning bells in my head: darcs >> >> then perhaps darcs convert . should be rejected, or at least give a >> warning message?Well, it certainly confused me. I > > The issue here isn't about darcs convert ".", but the fact that you're > converting and then pushing to some other repository. What is this > other repository that you are pushing to? > > To get an idea what I'm saying this, I'll repeat a bit of that > elaborate warning message we display when people run darcs convert: > > | WARNING: the repository produced by this command is not understood by > | the darcs 1 program, and patches cannot be exchanged between > | repositories in darcs 1 and darcs 2 formats. > | > | Furthermore, darcs 2 repositories created by different invocations of > | this command SHOULD NOT exchange patches, unless those repositories > | had no patches in common when they were converted. (That is, within a > | set of repos that exchange patches, no patch should be converted more > | than once.) > > Note particularly this paragraph... > > Thanks! > > PS: I've tried out darcs convert '.', which gives you a darcs 2 repository > under the current one: > > cd foo > darcs convert . > cd foo # yep, that's foo/foo > > I'll leave it up to darcs-users to decide if we should allow that, or if > the potential to confuse users is too great. Darcs convert should be > used in the same way as darcs get. > > -- > Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow> > PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9 > -- Thomas Hartman Need somewhere to host your code? patch-tag.com Want to build a webapp? happstack.com _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
