Daniel Carrera <[email protected]> writes: > Here is another improvement: Nothing stops you from having more than > one person sign the same patch. > > [hash: <hash-of-H> > sig: <daniel-signs-hash> > sig: <ganesh-signs-hash> > sig: <eric-signs-hash>] > [Added feature H. > depends: <hash-of-F> > depends: <hash-of-B> > [email protected]**20090331192735]
While we're at it, can someone (Eric) please put their foot down and decree that the next repository format (i.e. darcs-3) will use a standard markup for markup (i.e. XML) instead of adding bits on ad-hoc? I mean, for example, we currently have an "Ignore-This:" field that sure as hell looks like it's part of the patch description, because that was the only way to add it without breaking backwards compatibility. But it just looks silly, and it makes more work for people trying to just read the repo a little without resorting to libHSDarcs (e.g. Python scripters). > This allows some interesting workflows. For example: a patch can only > go in the stable branch if it's signed by a core developer. I realize you're not a fan of "darcs send", but the user manual describes such a workflow using signed patch bundles via email, applied automatically with procmail. _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
