On 2005-08-02, via RT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The current interface of darcs changes and darcs annotate includes
> various options that affect the criteria of patch selection and the form
> of output. These options seem insufficient for most people's needs of
> querying patches, and should
On 2005-07-29, Jan Scheffczyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> we have thought about supporting native XML patches in Darcs.
> Since OpenOffice documents are essentially XML, this should be a way
> to support native OpenOffice patches.
> The idea behind is to give applications a chance t
On 2005-08-09, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --=_
>
> I started using darcs to keep certain files in my home directory under revi=
> sion
> control. This is nice both to keep a history of changes and also so that w=
> hen I am
> on a new machine I can, for example, get my favorite
Quoting David Roundy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> No, working at a higher level won't address the postget "remote defaults"
> issue, what it will do is to make your run_posthook function unnecesary,
> which would mean that adding posthook support to a command will only
> require that the command add the
On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 09:33:52AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Could someone also look at the time it takes to record patches? Since
> my upgrade to 1.0.4pre2 I've noticed that darcs takes longer to
> actually record the patches (the interactive part of selecting patches
> to record seems
On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 12:29:21PM -0400, David Roundy wrote:
>
> Argh. That's an annoying bug. I've got a fix (which I'll send in soon)
> that fixes the problems that show up in the cabal repository, but I think
> there may still be problems with patches that delete the end of a file and
> then
Quoting Ian Lynagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Hi all,
>
> darcs get http://cvs.haskell.org/darcs/cabal
>
> is behaving differently with 1.0.3 and unstable (i.e. _darcs/current is
> different depending on which you use). This probably means there is
> some detail wrong with the more efficient app
On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 12:10:17AM +0100, Ian Lynagh wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> darcs get http://cvs.haskell.org/darcs/cabal
>
> is behaving differently with 1.0.3 and unstable (i.e. _darcs/current is
> different depending on which you use). This probably means there is
> some detail wrong with
Hi Ian,
This patch addresses the bug you pointed out in apply that affects the
cabal repository. I think it's a moderately clear fix, but I'm wondering
if perhaps we could achieve the same effect more elegantly and universally
if we were to just coalesce the patches before applying them. That
ap
Quoting Ian Lynagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > It's this sort of complexity that originally made me want to not try to
> > emulate shell parsing behavior.
>
> I agree. We need some sort of quoting for when arguments have spaces in,
> right? So how about we only allow " and allow anything to be escape
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 12:49:46AM +0200, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
> > This mostly reflects our different priorities regarding the
> > darcs-git-darcs round trip vs the git-darcs-git round trip.
>
> Yes. My feeling is that you're looking at things from Git's point of
> view, while I'm looking at
11 matches
Mail list logo
