On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 10:12:11PM +0100, Tommy Pettersson wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 03:50:36PM -0500, David Roundy wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 07:36:30PM +0000, Nicolas Pouillard wrote:
> > > > > Wed Jan 16 20:34:26 CET 2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > * Add --{allow,dont-allow,mark}-conflicts to darcs pull.
> > > > >
> > > > > This patch also merge the --external option to
> > > > > pull_conflicts_options
> > > > > like with apply.
> [...]
> > Actually, I see that Nicolas is copying the current behavior of apply. I
> > think a better rewrite here, however, would be to just rename
> > apply_conflict_options to conflict_options, and then we'd have uniform
> > behavior across the two commands. This also wouldn't be a change in the
> > behavior of apply.
>
> Unfortunately one problem with using the same option is that the
> [DEFAULT] information is currently hard-coded in the option's
> description, i.e., Pull and Apply can't have the same option
> with different descriptions of which is the default.
Argh. I am just way-over-impatient! (I'm anxioius to get a third
prerelease out soon...) You're right.
> Would it be acceptable to change the default for Apply to be the
> same as for Pull?
I don't think that's such a hot idea. The trouble is that this would make
pushing to central repositories much less pleasant. Darcs used to behave
this way, and it caused no end of trouble with folks getting conflict
markings in their pushed-to repositories. :(
--
David Roundy
Department of Physics
Oregon State University
_______________________________________________
darcs-devel mailing list
darcs-devel@darcs.net
http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-devel
