Hi, Jason Dagit <[email protected]> writes: > Can someone workout the rules for commuting symlink patches? I think treating > them as files which contain a path to where they point is a reasonable way to > model them. just a little (side)note: please don't do the mistake of introducing a new patch type for something that is adequately served by addfile and hunk patches. At least unless you want to repeat the setpref debacle. (It may be that addfile will need substituting, but definitely be wary of hunks.) Oh, and keep in mind that if we add a new patch type, we are making an incompatible darcs repository format (akin to the darcs-2 incompatibility, although arguably less severe).
Yours, Petr. _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
