Eric Kow wrote: > On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 10:07:21 -0500, Mark Stosberg wrote: >> > Also, unless I'm missing something, wouldn't you have just said 'n' >> > in the traditional interface for this case? >> >> Right, and then later a "revert". I was hoping to get two steps down to >> one. Instead of record+revert, I could just do a "record". > > Perhaps you want revert-upon-record.
For what it's worth, here is my +1 for revert-upon-record. It would be very useful, even in absence of interactive hunk editing. It also nicely integrates into the command line UI. Regarding the hunk editing UI: After some initial confusion (mostly sparked by the discussion on this list) I went and read the first two paragraphs of the explanation on the wiki and everything became crystal clear. It is important to users to understand the main principle (hunk editing never changes the working directory, the file lists before and after /state/, not /changes/). When I understood that, I found hunk editing UI quite nice and consistent. I vote for keeping it in 2.4. Maybe integrate a shortened version of the wiki explanation into the online help. Cheers Ben _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list darcs-users@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
