On Thursday, April 21, 2011 4:16:07 PM UTC-7, John Meacham wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;">Um, the patch theory is what makes darcs "just work". There is no need<br>to understand it any more than you have to know VLSI design to<br>understand how your computer works. The end result is that darcs<br>repositories don't get corrupted and the order you integrate patches<br>doesn't affect things meaning cherrypicking is painless.</blockquote><div><br>This is how it's <i>supposed</i> to work. My chief complaints with PT are:<br><ul><li>Metadata about branches and merges gets lost. This makes later examination of the merge history impossible, or at least unfeasibly difficult.</li><li>Every commit needs --ask-deps , because the automatic dependency detector can only detect automatic changes (and not things like adding a new function in a different module)</li><li>The order patches are integrated still matters (it's impossible for it to not matter), but there's no longer any direct support for ordering them, so large merges become very manual.</li><li>If you ever merge in the wrong order, future merges will begin consuming more and more CPU time until the repository "dies". Undoing this requires using darcs-fastconvert and performing manual surgery on the export files.<br></li></ul></div>