-----Original Message----- From: Thomas Schilling [mailto:nominolo@googlemail.com] Sent: 11 August 2008 12:18 To: Sittampalam, Ganesh Cc: Manuel Chakravarty; Don Stewart; Ian Lynagh; Simon Peyton-Jones; GHC Users Mailing List Subject: Re: Version control systems Thomas Schilling wrote:
On 11 Aug 2008, at 12:38, Sittampalam, Ganesh wrote:
Thomas Schilling wrote:
(I am also no longer convinced that Darcs' automatic patch dependency calculations are actually a good idea. Just because two patches don't touch the same files, doesn't mean they aren't semantically dependent. Take for example "monadification" patches, which are typically submitted split up for
each file. A branch captures those dependencies just fine.)
But the darcs approach to dependency is what underlies cherry-picking, which many people consider the most worthwhile feature of darcs. In fact many people would like it to be possible to override even the dependencies that darcs *does* find to cherry-pick patch A without patch B that A depends on, at the expense of producing a conflict that then has to be fixed up by hand.
Cherry-picking just a single patch is simple in Git: "git cherry-pick <commit-id>"[1].
I wasn't saying that Git doesn't support cherry-picking, just that you would expect dependencies to restrict what you can and can't cherry-pick; if you specify dependencies just in a linear fashion along each branch (i.e. each patch depends on all those before it on that branch) as I thought you were suggesting, then you enormously restrict what cherry-picks are possible. Ganesh ============================================================================== Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communications disclaimer: http://www.credit-suisse.com/legal/en/disclaimer_email_ib.html ==============================================================================