On Fri, 03 Sep 2010 12:35:43 +0200 Petr Rockai <m...@mornfall.net> wrote:
> I had a look at YAML, and it seems nice and I think we can compromise > for a regular subset of YAML quite easily. For changes --yaml, it > could look something like: > > - name: Remove redundant set -ev from tentative_revert.sh. > author: Petr Rockai <m...@mornfall.net> > date: 2010-09-03 00:13:27 +0 > hash: 20100903001327-fb03a-045b1923d4b1b1b432d3e3b03840101f4f9891e3 > salt: 3927beb21fed7484d681854a7d7df2c5 > comment: | > Some fancy comment that > spans multiple lines. > - name: Update changes_with_move for differences in annotate. > author: ... > (etc.) Yeah, exactly what I had in mind! > I am, however, a bit puzzled as to what to do about annotate, since > YAML doesn't seem to be very well suited for that. Right. Given your latest proposal, where annotate is just prefixing each content lines with the patch hash and a separator, I think it would be wrong "encapsulating" that into whatever markup. You aren't going to do that for "query contents" either :-) That, and the K.I.S.S. principle is respected too! The downside of your proposal is that it could be heavier for a human eye than the "patch index with a legend"... ciao, lele. -- nickname: Lele Gaifax | Quando vivrò di quello che ho pensato ieri real: Emanuele Gaifas | comincerò ad aver paura di chi mi copia. l...@nautilus.homeip.net | -- Fortunato Depero, 1929. _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list darcs-users@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
