Ben Franksen <benjamin.frank...@bessy.de> writes: > Ashley Moran wrote: >> On 4 Apr 2009, at 16:23, Guillaume Hoffmann wrote: >>> When you edit the long comment with darcs amend-record >>> --edit-long-comment , the first line is in fact the name (or short >>> description) of the patch. >> >> Thanks! I tested this and it works. >> >> I find this really non-intuitive though. I'd really like a way to do >> inline patch renaming via --edit-description, like the way you first >> enter a patch name. > > I agree. I found this quite unintuitive, even a hassle, when I learned > darcs. Sometimes you don't have a $DISPLAY in Unix. Then some > obscure 'default' editor comes up (this depends on system configuration and > is not always appropriate to change, for instance when using shared > accounts) which I don't even know how to exit from.
Arguably learning how to exit without saving from vi and nano should be one of your first UNIX lessons :-) To customize the editor temporarily on a shared account (such as root), you can set VISUAL and/or EDITOR to the name of your preferred editor, e.g. export EDITOR=ed darcs record Or one-shot EDITOR=ed darcs record Because it's not appropriate to make this permanent in .profile on a shared account, what we typically do at my workplace is each have our own $ENV script in /root, e.g. /root/.shrc.twb /root/.bashrc.alla /root/.bashrc.russm Then when you first log in, you just do . ~/.shrc.twb to get your preferred environment. > Would a patch be accepted that adds another switch to amend-record > (e.g. --edit-name)? The idea is that this starts only the line editor, and > presents the old patch name to be edited. There is already -m for that purpose, though it requires copy-and-pasting, I think the current choices of -m and --edit are adequate for amend-record, but I'm prepared to listen to arguments for a third intermediary option. I definitely DO think it's confusing the way all editor sessions currently have the patch name and the patch description, with no blank line separating them or other visual clues. I think this is EXTREMELY confusing for anyone who isn't already coming from a VCS that does that (e.g. CVS?) Even for me, it causes problems because I don't think I should add a blank line between patch name and description, but if I don't, it causes wrapping problems for my editor (which thinks it's all a single paragraph). Perhaps a better style would be that of an email message, e.g. Author: <patch author> Date: <date> Summary: <patch name> <patch description> This would also provide an alternative way to spoof author and date. Currently the latter can only be spoofed with --pipe, which is a massive pain in the arse for interactive use, as input validation isn't done until the end. _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list darcs-users@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users