On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 6:23 AM, Marc Weber <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi, > > git-darcs-import: > - adds 4 source files to darcs > - adds 1 executable item to the .cabal file > - can import the ghc repository into a git repository within minutes > > Why? > - git blame is faster than darcs annotate > - gitk qgit can be used to browse history and see which patch changed > what. > I always feel very uncomfortable reading darcs changes -v > > However I'd like to make this tool mainstream which means it should be > integrated into the official darcs distribution. > Hi Marc, Thanks for the patches. We recently started tracking patches in our issue tracker. The current way to submit patches is by attaching them to an email to [email protected] (if you use 'darcs send' this should be automated assuming your sendmail is working). Do you think you could please send this patch + description to the [email protected]. That way we can better help you by tracking the patch and not losing it. We also have a semi-formal process now for new feature requests. Here are some questions that must be answered for new features: http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/darcs-users/2009-November/022397.html Additionally, there has been a (not terribly popular) suggestion that we have plugins: http://bugs.darcs.net/issue1504 This feature could possibly be a well-behaved plugin. > > However I don't know the darcs code base very well. > Maybe you can help me figuring out whether this should be a darcs > command rather than an additional executable and what to tidy up? > I'd rather see it as a separate tool. I don't really see why importers/exporters should be baked into the normal darcs binary. > > You can apply this darcs patch to darcs to compile git-darcs-import > > http://mawercer.de/~marc/git-darcs-import.darcspatch<http://mawercer.de/%7Emarc/git-darcs-import.darcspatch> > > Importing darcs itself fails with: > That's no good! > > How do you think about this? > > By the way I asked about this one year ago: > http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/darcs-devel/2008-November/008780.html > > So should I try using darcs library instead now? > I think so. To me it seems reasonable for people to implement 'darcs related tools' using libHSdarcs (available on Hackage) and then host the project somewhere such as patch-tag or community.haskell.org. Using cabal lets you depend on the specific versions of libHSdarcs. So even if we change the api, you can depend on specific versions. One last note. Is it possible in your patches to not upgrade base? It seems like that should be orthogonal to your proposed feature. Thanks, Jason
_______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
