[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: DARCS
From: |
Ethan Benson |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: DARCS |
Date: |
Sun, 7 Sep 2003 14:24:14 -0800 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.3.28i |
On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 02:16:21AM +1000, Damien Elmes wrote:
> Mirian Crzig Lennox <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > Why "gah?" The alternative is to clutter the user's source tree with
> > magical names like "{arch}", ",,what-changed.foo" and ++log.bar",
> > requiring added complexity to tell them apart from actual source.
> > Directories are the canonical way to partition namespace in Unix, so
> > we may as well use them. Let the kernel do our work for us rather
> > than requiring every utility know how to recognise junk paths from
> > source.
> >
> > This is also the rationale behind the common practice of keeping build
> > directories separate from one's source trees.
>
> The ,,what-changed stuff no longer appears by default in recent tla
> releases. The log filename could probably be shortened a bit so it
> doesn't mess up the directory listing wrapping, but it's not a huge
> problem. {arch} is a simple grep -v away if it's a bother.
>
> I remember being quite turned off by all the funnily named files when
> I first started arch. But really I couldn't care anymore - I know for
> one that having to do something like "cd project/actual-tree" where
> project/ contained {arch} etc would be far more of a pain than having
> the files sitting inside the same tree. Maybe there's some scope for
> improvements here, but it's certainly not the priority I once
> considered it. It can be convenient to have those "arch droppings" in
> easy view, and the ,, files are easy to remove.
{arch} and .arch-ids are no worse then CVS and SVN and BitKeeper all
over the place. arch is better even since .arch-ids is hidden from
standard lists, and never bothers greps and typical finds.
the only annoyance for me is the pristine trees in {arch} which screw
up rgrep. but ive heard tom say he wanted to kill pristine trees
anyway, so that may well solve itself.
> A tool like "cvs export" would probably a good thing though.
i would like this, i personally don't want to ship any version control
data with releases. in any event its easy enough to remove this
without an export command.
--
Ethan Benson
http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/
pgpEKoU_qZpG1.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: DARCS, (continued)
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: DARCS, Miles Bader, 2003/09/05
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] DARCS, Mirian Crzig Lennox, 2003/09/06
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: DARCS, Miles Bader, 2003/09/06
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] DARCS, Zack Brown, 2003/09/06
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: DARCS, Miles Bader, 2003/09/06
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: DARCS, Bruce Stephens, 2003/09/07
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: DARCS, Miles Bader, 2003/09/07
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: DARCS, Bruce Stephens, 2003/09/07
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: DARCS, Mirian Crzig Lennox, 2003/09/07
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: DARCS, Damien Elmes, 2003/09/07
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: DARCS,
Ethan Benson <=
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: DARCS, Bruce Stephens, 2003/09/07
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: DARCS, Robert Anderson, 2003/09/07
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: DARCS, Ethan Benson, 2003/09/08
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: DARCS, Bruce Stephens, 2003/09/08
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: DARCS, Robert Anderson, 2003/09/08
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: DARCS, Bruce Stephens, 2003/09/08
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: DARCS, Tom Lord, 2003/09/08
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: DARCS, Miles Bader, 2003/09/08
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: DARCS, Tom Lord, 2003/09/08
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: DARCS, Mirian Crzig Lennox, 2003/09/09