Eric Kow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 15:19:46 -0400, Max Battcher wrote: >> meaningful when it shows up in .dpatch-es. For instance, "Patch-salt:" >> would provide more information about what that field is and why the UI >> hides it but it is contained in the patches.
+1, for the reasons Eric gives: > Interesting thought. The code is designed to allow us to rename or > add more ignorable fields in the future. Indeed "Patch salt" sounds > more informative. Send a patch? Also, RFC 822 specifies extension fields have names starting with "X-". Perhaps a similar convention could be used here? That is, as separate features: - by default, darcs suppresses X- fields in user output. - darcs >>2.1 uses X-Patch-Salt internally to avoid <a problem>. _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
