3 ms·
Yes, I don't understand why Pijul didn't re-implement the guts under basically the Darcs interface rather than re-doing it all. It's not obvious that it wouldn'
by gnufx 9y ago
Yes, I don't understand why Pijul didn't re-implement the guts under basically the Darcs interface rather than re-doing it all. It's not obvious that it wouldn't fit.
I don't understand the comparing repos requirement. if I'm comparing Darcs branches it's going to be for the presence or absence of certain patches; what else do you normally need? Also, how does Darcs' rebasing negate the benefits of the model?
- colanderman 9y ago> I don't understand the comparing repos requirement. if I'm comparing Darcs branches it's going to be for the presence or absence of certain patches; what else do you normally need? It's a lot easier to tell someone "I have commit 94ba73df, check that out", than to send them a list of 10,000 patches they ought to have. > Also, how does Darcs' rebasing negate the benefits of the model? What I mean is, the fact that Git (or Mercurial, or whatever) has rebasing mostly negates the benefits of the Darcs model (since it's nearly as easy to move patches around), and does so without adding any complexity, since it's not like you can do away with rebasing entirely in Darcs anyway.