>>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Zander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Thomas> What we could do is the following;
Thomas> V V V V V V [local]
Thomas> foo
Thomas> *********** [2005foo - the full name of the patch that holds the
code in \
Thomas> the next part]
Thomas> bar
Thomas> ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
That's the Interface That Users Demand[tm], but is it clear that we
can _implement_ that?
That is, does Darcs compute the conflicts before applying any patches,
or does it apply prerequisite patches until it encounters a conflict?
If the former, we're OK (except that it's totally non-lazy and sounds
hellaciously inefficient in the no-conflict case).
If the latter, it's quite possible that the conflict region is now in
a state that the user will never have seen before! In that case
"local" is a lie.
--
School of Systems and Information Engineering http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp
University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Ask not how you can "do" free software business;
ask what your business can "do for" free software.
_______________________________________________
darcs-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.abridgegame.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
