On Jan 20, 2010, at 5:32 PM, Eric Kow <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 22:00:32 +0000, Ganesh Sittampalam wrote: >> I don't think I'm the best person to decide on whether the text is clear. >> (It is >> to me, for what it's worth.) > > Mark, Isaac [and ideally, a user who hasn't already chimed in]? > > I repeat the text for convenience. > > Interactive hunk edit: > - This edit will not affect your working copy > - To split a block of added text, remove the part you want to postpone > - To split a block of removed text, copy back the part you want to retain > - Arbitrary editing is supported
For what it's worth, this text is quite clear to me. I've been loosely following the discussion, and I was completely confused with the earlier move-the-split-marker-around stuff, but this new UI and instructions seem quite intuitive. I think the key to my understanding was realizing that it's a "chronological" split of a hunk rather than a textual line split (if that makes any sense). If it won't be too verbose, it might be good to mention something about how a post-split hunk (is that what the "filler" patch is?) will be created to bring the AFTER state to the current working copy state. That would clarify how bullet points 1 and 4 work. 2 cents. Daniel _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
