On 6 May 2011, at 22:21, Wolfgang Dobler wrote: > Now there probably are some reasons for darcs' design, and we certainly > cannot simply change the default behaviour.
I actually like the current behavior and find it more useful for my workflow. The fact that darcs reports modified files with their absolute path helps to identify what files changed, no matter in which directory you are (this is even more useful if you have similarly named files in different directories). With relative paths I would have to mentally compute the actual paths depending on what directory I'm in, in order to figure out which file changed and where (especially for the case with similarly named files in different directories). Now, I never copy/paste the file names from darcs whatsnew when I record, so the current behavior doesn't create this issue for me. I pretty much prefer to either use cherry picking and decide which hunks from which files to record interactively, or if I really have to type a file name I use bash completion. YMMV. > But I would like to see a flag > (that I can put in my ~/.darcs/defaults) giving me git's file name > handling here: > > cd level0/level1 > darcs whatsnew --relative-filenames > # M ./some.file -1 +1 > # M ../top-level.file -2 +17 > darcs record ./some.file ../top-level.file I don't see a problem with this approach, as long as it can keep everybody happy. -- Dan _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
