On Fri, 4 Feb 2011, Michael Olney wrote:
<[email protected]> wrote:
I think the important pieces are an appropriate set of definitions, a set of
properties that all patch system should obey, a proof that the existing
implementation of "primitive" patches in darcs obeys those properties, and a
proof that anything that obeys those properties does indeed behave
consistently when you commute and merge patches in it.
It may be my own ignorance at work, but it's not clear to me how much
mileage you would get out of this scheme. The basic properties of
patch theory seem to be extremely general. Consistency with these
properties alone doesn't appear to tell me much about how the system
is going to behave when I use it.
The key property is that any given set of patches, you get the same
repository state no matter what order those patches are currently stored
in. That underpins the "first-class cherry-picking" and "no fresh
commit for merges" that darcs has and other VCS systems don't.
Ganesh
_______________________________________________
darcs-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
