Hi Evan, agreed, I reverted that patch in Darcs HEAD (we will see about reintroducing the feature after the release).
Also, the OpenBSD maintainers have re-enabled `show dependencies` [1] so it does not seem that it is a blocker anymore. Ganesh could fix compiling failures under Windows, but there are still problems with encodings in the test suite (see http://bugs.darcs.net/patch1628). Guillaume [1] https://twitter.com/OpenBSD_ports/status/932767590832750592 2017-12-12 22:29 GMT-03:00 Evan Laforge <qdun...@gmail.com>: > I vote for just revert the patch, assuming it's still easy to do. The > "release discipline" I'm familiar with is to always revert any > regressions as soon as possible, unless they are fixing something more > important. And if I read the patch notes correctly, it seems like > this was a case where the documentation said it would detect conflicts > but it never did, and it took years for anyone to notice, so it seems > not so critical. Once the regression is fixed then there original > patch can be amended with a performance fix at leisure. > > On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 4:00 PM, Guillaume Hoffmann <guilla...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> I agree, we should also fix this problem for 2.14, thanks for recalling us :) >> >> I still do not know what we should do about it in little time, >> implementing _darcs/conflicts seems to me the best solution but also >> just reverting the change would be a good temporary solution until we >> get it right. >> >> Guillaume >> >> 2017-12-12 16:06 GMT-03:00 Evan Laforge <qdun...@gmail.com>: >>> Can we revert the patch that causes issue 2541? For me, the slowdown >>> is a strong enough reason to either compile a 2.10 for linux (which I >>> recall is tricky because you have to also install an old ghc) or >>> migrate off darcs. I haven't done either yet because I mostly work on >>> OS X and the 2.10 binary is still available. In any case, I think the >>> feature added "look for conflicting files" which makes everything so >>> slow is not worth making whatsnew so slow over. >>> >>> I'm surprised there hasn't been a bigger fuss about this, maybe there >>> are no medium sized darcs repos left? >>> >>> On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 6:34 AM, Guillaume Hoffmann <guilla...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> there has been a recent breakage of darcs 2.12 build on stackage, and >>>> fixing it would require bumping several dependencies upper bounds, >>>> including base. >>>> >>>> Rather than doing that, I find more economical to prepare a release of >>>> Darcs 2.14. For this we need to fix the following: >>>> >>>> * windows compilation (broken by Ben's encoding changes) >>>> * make dependency on graphviz optional (hence the command `darcs show >>>> dependencies`) (see http://bugs.darcs.net/patch1626 ) >>>> >>>> There are still bundles to review and tons of bugs to fix, but they >>>> are not blockers for a 2.14.0 release. >>>> >>>> Opinions? >>>> >>>> Guillaume >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> darcs-users mailing list >>>> darcs-users@osuosl.org >>>> https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list darcs-users@osuosl.org https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users