On Sat, 9 Jan 2010, Max Battcher wrote:
On 1/9/2010 15:37, Reinier Lamers wrote:
Hello Luca,
Op woensdag 23 december 2009 12:00 schreef je:
Have you already applied this? I may have found a bug on it.
I considered applying it tonight, but it raised some more questions on IRC:
[21:26]<Heffalump> it effectively throws away the existing cache,
right?
[21:26] * Heffalump is a bit dubious about that
I agree with these concerns.
Just to amplify on this - it might lead to user confusion when a get they
expected to be fast because the patches were cached turned out not to be.
Also, leaving around the old files might waste their disk space without
them knowing.
Shouldn't it be relatively simple to throw in a fallback to check for
non-subdirectory cache files?
At the very least darcs optimize (or a new darcs optimize --cache, even)
should be setup to convert caches to subdirectory caches.
I think both these suggestions make sense. The one issue with the fallback
is that it might be slow, but I'd hope that where the main directory was
nearly empty it would be fine. darcs could also print out a warning
suggesting the use of darcs optimize --cache when it used the fallback
option.
Ganesh
_______________________________________________
darcs-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
