Mark Stosberg writes: > It was said that a goal with the current implementation was to be > consist with the fact that "record" never modifies the working > copy.
> So I ask the rest of the user list, would you expect that "edit" during > darcs record would trigger editting a piece of a file, or would you > expect it to edit one more patches in memory? I would expect an edit operation to allow me to commute primitive patches, perhaps defined somewhat differently than current Darcs (since hunk splitting actually changes a patch that is currently termed "primitive" IIRC). _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
