Hi Jeremy,
On 12 Feb 2012, at 19:03, Jeremy O'Donoghue wrote:
Becuse Darcsden uses the darcs 2.0 repo format (not the hashed format), I
cannot push patches from my local copy of Dave's Darcsden to my local c.h.o
(which is using the hashed repo format).
That's interesting. Are you sure it actually converts it?
darcs show repo shows that http://darcsden.com/jodonoghue/wxhaskell-wx29-jod
is a hashed repo. Do I have the right URI?
Recreating the patches and their comments by hand would be inexpressibly
tedious, so I wanted to know if there is any reason not to upgrade the c.h.o
repo to the 2.0 format. If I understand things correctly, this has been the
Darcs default since 2008, and it would let us
Any suggestions, advice or warnings before I start along this path?
See http://wiki.darcs.net/FAQ#upgrading-to-darcs-2
I tend to advise people to stick to darcs 1 (hashed) if they have a
pre-existing repo.
New repos, sure. But old repos, maybe best for now to just stick with what you
know
--
Eric Kow http://erickow.com
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
--
Virtualization Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning
Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing
also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service.
http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/___
wxhaskell-devel mailing list
wxhaskell-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wxhaskell-devel
