On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 11:58:58AM +0000, Eric Y. Kow wrote: > On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 00:11:50 -0000, David Roundy wrote: > > When recording, the new code that announces that patches are skipped due to > > dependencies sometimes gives false positives. To reproduce this, make > > several independent changes to a file, run an interactive record and hit > > 'f' on the first change. This should select all the changes, and does, but > > you get a confusing message claiming some changes have been skipped due to > > dependencies. > > Hmm, that is indeed confusing. Is it just the messages that are at > fault or is there a deeper rework of the code needed. I am guessing > that what we really need are 4 different messages: > > - Skipping the next N patches as requested > - Skipping the next N patches due to dependencies > - Taking the next N patches as requested > - Taking the next N patches due to dependencies
Just switching from "Skipping" to "Taking" when appropriate will go a long
way towards fixing this, and I recommend just that change for now, as some
rework of the patch selection may be needed for darcs-2, due to changing
semantics.
But yes, if we change PatchChoices to hold a five possible states per patch
we could do this ("yes", "no", "maybe", "yes, due to dependencies" and "no,
due to dependencies"). We might be able to concatenate this into four
states, since "maybe" always defaults one direction.
--
David Roundy
Department of Physics
Oregon State University
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ darcs-devel mailing list darcs-devel@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-devel
