Simon Marlow wrote: > A thought that occurred to me before, but I forgot to mention in my > previous emails about rebase: since what you're doing is basically > hacking the repository format to support two branches (one current, > one for suspended patches), maybe it would make more sense in the > long run to think about how to support multiple branches in one repo, > and then to build the rebase implementation on top of that. Perhaps > the multi-branch support wouldn't need to be exposed via user > commands initially, and it would only support the internal operations > required by rebase, but it would be heading in the right direction. > > Anyway, just a thought.
Yeah, that thought had occurred to me too. I also think there are some workflows that might make sense for rebase that really would require multi-branch repos to make them work sanely - for example having a mode for 'rebase pull' where the remote patches are the ones that are suspended, rather than the local ones. However even internally multi-branch repos would be painful, and rebase is actually not massively invasive of the existing codebase (because the suspended patches are all held in a single patch which looks like a normal patch to the rest of the code), so for now I'm going to stick with the specialised route. Ganesh =============================================================================== Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communications disclaimer: http://www.credit-suisse.com/legal/en/disclaimer_email_ib.html =============================================================================== _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
