Re: StGIT: "stg new" vs "stg new --force"
- From
- Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org>
- Date
- Jan 19, 2006, 00:49 UTC
- Message-ID
- <1137631749.13853.22.camel@dv>
- In-Reply-To
- <20060118193717.GI32585@nowhere.earth>
On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 20:37 +0100, Yann Dirson wrote:
Show 19 quoted lines
> > > It would even be useful sometimes to dispatch changes to a single file > > > into several patches. When they are distinct enough to be in > > > different diff hunks, it is pretty easy to split an existing patch, > > > but it could also be useful to only refresh a patch with specific diff > > > hunks. A possibility would be to add a filterdiff-like "-#<n>" flag, > > > in addition to the above-suggested "refresh <file>" (and possibly only > > > allow to specify a single file together with this flag). > > > > I think if would be better to improve "stg fold" to work on arbitrary > > patches. This way, you prepare the patch in the editor (which would not > > be harder than finding hunk numbers) and fold it into the patch of your > > choice. stg should check that the stack remains valid, possibly doing > > trivial adjustments to the higher patches. The current tree should not > > be impacted. > > This sounds like a good idea as well (and I would use it on a near > daily basis as well ;). Obviously such a request can also fail, > eg. when requesting to fold a change into a patch, where a subsequent > patch modifies the same lines.
Definitely. Hard cases should be handled by hand.
> But it would not be a replacement to selecting changes with a > granularity finer than file-level, which is what I wanted to suggest.
Why? Maybe you got confused by two meanings of the word "patch"? I think StGIT should use some other term, e.g. changeset. I meant that the diff file (e.g. made by "stg diff") could be edited and folded into one of the StGIT patches (changesets). Unless you want non-interactive separation of the hunks, using an editor should be a reasonable approach.
I believe StGIT should be primarily designed to be used interactively. Your approach looks like a usability disaster to me. The user is supposed to find numbers of the hunks, although s/he is working on the whole file (since it's "stg refresh").
My approach suggests that the user work with the diff from the beginning, and separates the changes by looking at them.
-- Regards, Pavel Roskin