On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 03:26:51PM +0000, Simon Marlow wrote: > David Roundy wrote: > > We are happy to announce the third prerelease version of darcs 2! Darcs 2 > > features numerous improvements, and it seems that we have fixed most of the > > regressions, so we're looking for help, from users willing to try this > > release out. Read below, to see how you can benefit from this new release, > > and how you can help us to make the final darcs 2 release the best ever! > > > > The third prerelease features (apart from numerous bug and performance > > regression fixes) a completely rewritten rollback command and new > > progress-reporting functionality. If darcs takes more than a couple of > > seconds for a given operation and provides you with no feedback as to what > > it's up to, let us know, so we can fine-tune the progress-reporting output! > > The progress reporting is fantastic! It's worth upgrading to darcs2 just > for that :-)
Thanks! I've enjoyed it myself, actually... > ... Although the progress reporting doesn't appear to work quite as well > on darcs-1 repositories as it does on darcs-2 repositories - is that > expected? No, it's not really expected, but the progress reporting is rather hastily thrown together, so it's not surprising, either. Basically I first converted the existing progress-reporting code (which reported getting patches with darcs get, and applying them in a few other instances), and then started throwing in progress annotations in other spots until my couple of test commands and the ones I normally use seemed to be pretty snappy (I'm not sure what the right word for a lack of delays in progress-reporting). > There are still times when I see nothing happening, for example in the > unpull test on the GHC repo (see previous messages), the last progress > message I get is > > Reading patches in /64playpen/simonmar/ghc-darcs2 17040 > > and it sits there for 7-8 seconds before completing. Does this maybe shed > any light on why this unpull is 2 times slower than darcs1? Hmmm. I'll take a look. This is basically equivalent to something like darcs obliterate --last 400 -a I believe? The ghc repo definitely stresses different parts of darcs, because of its large size (which means you often have the privilege of reporting poor behavior). -- David Roundy Department of Physics Oregon State University _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe