Am 03.12.2011, 07:13 Uhr, schrieb Stephen J. Turnbull <[email protected]>:

 > Example: I'd want to manage object library files (graphic objects,
> organized in libraries stored as ASCII text) through darcs. Darcs should > only identify single hunks using specification in the user recipe. > Goal: > prevent the creation of too many hunks caused by alternating lines within > an information entity that are modified, and lines in between that are not
 > modified.

What do you mean be "too many hunks"?  Why is "many hunks" a problem?

Well, a hunk is actually an identified unit with an index (when I'm right). According to the famous camp webcast, this can be used to extract the "history" of a single text chunk within a file, without being cluttered by information of other chunks that is particularly not of interest in a given situation. For this to work optimally in a given sort of file structure that is to be versioned, it would help when darcs can be "instructed" how to identify hunks (e.g. via regexps in a prehook). In the current state of darcs, when e.g. a library element of a library file is changed, darcs could identify several hunks of one single element, when some lines in this element are changed, and others are not changed. This way, hunks are not very meaningful, and would also hinder efficient hunk-by-hunk record. When versioning source code, just as another example, a function or data struct could be defined as a hunk entity: regardless how many hunks are identified within the scope of a function (in "current" darcs), a recipe could join those hunks to form a hunk per function or struct.

Note that the source code example solely serves this purpose and not more than that. My idea of "smart" hunk assignment will especially be useful with repos that contain only a small amount of large files, as is mostly the case with libraries, or even some script code out there, e.g. gitk.
_______________________________________________
darcs-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users

Reply via email to