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
