On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 08:13:40 +0100, Petr Rockai wrote: > it seems we need a decision whether we should use some sort of > abstraction over "_darcs/foo" (like a global constant, darcsdir and > concatenation, or something a little smarter or whatever).
Petr's efforts to avoid a lengthy bikeshed discussion worked *too* well :-) > 1) "_darcs/pristine.hashed" > 2) darcsdir "pristine.hashed" > 3) darcsdir hashedPristineDir > 4) darcsdir HashedPristineDir > 5) darcsdir HashedPristine > 6) hashedPristineDir -- includes "_darcs" > 7) darcsdir ++ "/" ++ "pristine.hashed" > 8) darcsdir ++ "/" ++ hashedPristineDir > 9) darcsdir ++ "/" ++ hashedDir HashedPristine > 10) any of 5-7 with </> instead of ++ "/" ++ > 11) Some variation of the naming. (dir_hashedPristine, ...) We had a round-table discussion about this at the Zurich sprint and it looks like the consensus is to get rid of hard-coded "_darcs" and also to use </>... I doubt the other issues related to this matter. -- Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow> PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9
pgp2kAkp0XtsZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
