Thomas Schilling wrote:

> (I am also no longer convinced that Darcs'
> automatic patch dependency calculations are
> actually a good idea.  Just because two patches
> don't touch the same files, doesn't mean they
> aren't semantically dependent.  Take for
> example "monadification" patches, which are
> typically submitted split up for each file.
> A branch captures those dependencies just fine.)

But the darcs approach to dependency is what underlies cherry-picking,
which many people consider the most worthwhile feature of darcs. In fact
many people would like it to be possible to override even the
dependencies that darcs *does* find to cherry-pick patch A without patch
B that A depends on, at the expense of producing a conflict that then
has to be fixed up by hand.

Ganesh

==============================================================================
Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communications 
disclaimer: 

http://www.credit-suisse.com/legal/en/disclaimer_email_ib.html
==============================================================================

_______________________________________________
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Reply via email to