On Tue, 19 Apr 2005, Tupshin Harper wrote:
>
> I suspect that any use of wildcards in a new format would be impossible
> for darcs since it wouldn't allow darcs to construct dependencies,
> though I'll leave it to david to respond to that.
Note that git _does_ very efficiently (and I mean _very_) expose the
changed files.
So if this kind of darcs patch is always the same pattern just repeated
over <n> files, then you really don't need to even list the files at all.
Git gives you a very efficient file listing by just doing a "diff-tree"
(which does not diff the _contents_ - it really just gives you a pretty
much zero-cost "which files changed" listing).
So that combination would be 100% reliable _if_ you always split up darcs
patches to "common elements".
And note that there does not have to be a 1:1 relationship between a git
commit and a darcs patch. For example, say that you have a darcs patch
that does a combination of "change token x to token y in 100 files" and
"rename file a into b". I don't know if you do those kind of "combination
patches" at all, but if you do, why not just split them up into two? That
way the list of files changed _does_ 100% determine the list of files for
the token exchange.
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
