Hi Stephen, On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 01:47:31 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > I'm not Johan, but let me comment anyway.
Yes, please! > I don't understand who you are trying to save from what here. In case this clarifies my concerns, I'm operating on a very basic level of worrying here. In other words, I'd be nervous about the prospect of Darcs becoming more difficult to use (Not sure I have a complete definition for that yet: maybe that you have to learn how a lot of new concepts, commands, and how a lot of options fit together; or it suddenly becomes easy to do things you did not want). Independently of the usefulness of branching, I need to get a good way to get a feeling for how the presence of branching affects the sort of simplicity I'd like to see Darcs preserving. Maybe there actually is a way to do it, just some sort of simple addressing scheme and then a set of darcs branch commands that most people can ignore. But that's as far as I've gotten. > At the lowest level, you're saying it matters whether the patch I need > is currently stored locally or in some other repository. That's > clearly a mostly bogus distinction.[1] Copy the patch and be done > with it, OK? I'm not sure I'm saying that. How? I was merely trying to see if the no-remote-branches approach would allow us to avoid inventing some sort of addressing scheme for remote branches. That's all. To be clear, the only thing I was worrying about in that mail is one day finding ourselves in a position where people are scratching their heads and wondering 'how do I use this darn thing?', at least more so than they may be doing so now. > The next level problem is that if your VCS supports colocated > branches, you might commit to the "wrong" branch because you forgot > which one you're in. Fixing this is just a rebase (and maybe > splitting the first patch). Well, hey, isn't Darcs the world's best > tool for rebasing, and no slouch at splitting up patches? And note > that this can surely happen without *remote* branches. I believe your mail may be ascribing a more advanced level of worrying to me than I intended :-), in the sense that I'm not really trying to save anybody from any sort of shooting-in-foot. > I can think of one use case where pulling a remote branch would be > very useful. That is the case where bootstrapping your project is > very expensive. The workflow here is to create a repository in one of > the usual ways, and bootstrap it. Now, if you want to test someone's > changes, instead of cloning their branch (moderately to very expensive > in a big tree) and bootstrapping (very expensive), you simply pull the > delta to their branch into your "build&test" working tree and remake > the changed files. Thanks for that. -- Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow> PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9
pgpuabTayoyZ6.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
