>> 1) scp-ing a tarball of the local _darcs, untarring it and >> darcs-getting it. (darcs-reverting it would work but would leave all >> _darcs/prefs/ files like mots, email...). >> Seems dirty, but this is what put does: deploying a repository on a >> remote server. > > This is what http://bugs.darcs.net/issue1066 recommends for what it's > worth
Nice, this recommends that put would not rely on any instance of darcs on the remote machine. So the idea would be to do a local get, compress the whole new working copy + _darcs, then scp the tarball to the remote machine ? >> I'm more in favor of Option 1), especially since there is currently >> work by Alexey on darcs optimize --http. Maybe we could use the same >> code for darcs-getting the contents of a tarball? >> Once we can write the following, the rest will flow: >> >> $ darcs get repo_name.tar.bz2 # contains only the _darcs directory > > Not sure I understood this (but I'm in skim-and-triage mode right now, > sorry!) I propose to add the feature of getting from tarballs with the above syntax. Then, getting an http-optimized repository would involve retrieving a tarball, darcs-getting it with this new syntax, rm'ing the tarball and then darcs-pulling the rest of the patches. ( I haven't looked at Alexey's patches yet. ) But now that I have seen http://bugs.darcs.net/issue1066 , there si less incentive to have this new feature. guillaume _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
