On Wed, 12 Jan 2011, Claus Reinke wrote: > > In my understanding, the unorderedness of patch history in darcs is > there to make distributed repos easier (fewer constraints: same set of > patches, but not same order; can mix local commits and pulls from > various repos, no need for a central repo),
Apart from variable patch ordering all of that is true of all DVCSs. > and because darcs has a causal rather than a temporal view of patch > history (which patch depends on which other patches, instead of which > patch came first). You can emulate darcs's patch re-ordering in git if you put each independent sequence of patches on a separate branch. Then you can re-merge the branches in whatever order you want. This is a fairly common git workflow. > In other words, always keep a branch/repo that only pulls from the central > repos (no other source of patches). It is normal in git to keep a pristine branch for each remote repository that you pull from - git sets these branches up by default. There can be many remotes in a git repository. Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch <d...@dotat.at> http://dotat.at/ HUMBER THAMES DOVER WIGHT PORTLAND: NORTH BACKING WEST OR NORTHWEST, 5 TO 7, DECREASING 4 OR 5, OCCASIONALLY 6 LATER IN HUMBER AND THAMES. MODERATE OR ROUGH. RAIN THEN FAIR. GOOD. _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users