Eric Kow <ko...@darcs.net> writes: > On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 14:51:16 +0200, Petr Rockai wrote: >> > I just saw the disjointed thread about this in Gmane, but I can't find a >> > description of what's actually proposed for annotate. Could someone >> > point me at it (e.g. as a message id, if it was posted here)? > > See also http://bugs.darcs.net/issue25
The timestamp in that git format looks longer than necessary, which takes extra space but, more importantly, it's not in UTC. Also it's not clear to me that I can find the relevant patch name easily, as I can with Peter's format. > Unfortunately, I had not done a good job of making it clear that > the proposed git-blame style UI was the proposed way of going > forward. I don't have particularly strong feelings anyway, just > as long as we have good reasons for picking what we finally go > with. Right. I hope a real example of practice is useful. > Folks who would like to weigh in are more than welcome -- we need your > perspective -- but please and take take stock of what has already been > said to help us avoid going around in circles. >From the point of view of using this in Emacs VC, I think I want: * A format that's trivial to parse, probably in a fixed format like the original one from CVS -- don't make me parse XML or YAML; * Something that's easily distinguishable from the previous format, though doing an initial `darcs --version' is probably OK for that; * Information that gives me the patch timestamp, author, and name without having to run darcs for each one in the file. I think Peter's initial table in the human-readable version is OK for that, but I haven't looked at implementing it yet. By the way, the current implementation of the Emacs support is at <http://www.loveshack.ukfsn.org/emacs/vc-darcs.el>, but probably moving soon. _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list darcs-users@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
