"Sittampalam, Ganesh" <[email protected]> writes:
> I would hope that it would be fairly trivial, but I know nothing about > emacs modes. I know a little, but not enough :-) > Simon Marlow mentioned last week that he thought darcsum would really > need darcs to provide a simpler way to just split a hunk > (http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/darcs-users/2010-January/022983.html) Thanks for the link. (I don't subscribe to darcs-users -- perhaps I ought to -- and was reading this from -café). > - is that what you'd want too or would you want the full power of > editing? I think this would get me 90% of the way, yes. > Naively I'd expect that it should be easier for an editor mode > to cope with actually editing a patch, though I imagine if most people > just wanted to split then there would be a simpler UI possible. An alternative might be to allow the user to arbitrarily edit (in an Emacs buffer) a temporary copy of the file? This way I could also check my changes with C-c C-l before recording - I often record my changes in different patches, but this means that the intermediate stages aren't tested, and may not even compile. > If there's demand and it can be slotted into the UI neatly, I think this could be done entirely within Emacs/darcsum, so perhaps it's not a darcs issue at all. -k -- If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
