On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 08:53:57PM +0100, Ganesh Sittampalam wrote:
Some random comments about the bits I can digest easily:
On Wed, 12 Jul 2006, David Roundy wrote:
2. We're going to have to be doing considerably more rearranging and
modifying of patches than in current darcs, in which a
On Thu, 13 Jul 2006, David Roundy wrote:
On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 08:53:57PM +0100, Ganesh Sittampalam wrote:
On Wed, 12 Jul 2006, David Roundy wrote:
This would give us for free the feature that patches that are
identical except in name do not conflict.
I've said this before, but please
On Thu, 13 Jul 2006, David Roundy wrote:
[identical patches conflicting or not]
But it's not a conflict, that's the point.
If it is a conflict, then we can easily resolve it and push the resolution
to everyone else.
If it isn't a conflict, then we're in trouble if we wanted it to be one,
Some random comments about the bits I can digest easily:
On Wed, 12 Jul 2006, David Roundy wrote:
2. We're going to have to be doing considerably more rearranging and
modifying of patches than in current darcs, in which a patch file is
untouched after it's created in a repository.
Is this
