Perl 6 - the future is here, just unevenly distributed

IRC log for #darcs, 2016-04-08

| Channels | #darcs index | Today | | Search | Google Search | Plain-Text | summary

All times shown according to UTC.

Time Nick Message
00:57 Big_G joined #darcs
01:47 ilbot3 joined #darcs
01:47 Topic for #darcs is now Darcs/Pijul Sprint, Helsinki, 6th-8th May http://darcs.net/Sprints/2016-05 | http://darcs.net/ | logs: http://irclog.perlgeek.de/darcs/ | darcs 2.10.3 is out http://darcs.net/Releases/2.10
07:43 betabug joined #darcs
07:53 betabug hi! darcs 2.10 brought this change in the UI section: "when no patch name given, directly invoke text editor" - is there a way to revert that behavior? maybe a prefs setting that I overlooked?
07:54 betabug I'd like to have a prompt again for a patch name + the prompt for a long comment
08:15 fr33domlover pointfree, the ssh-hans README mentins something is missing in the connection implementation, did you check out that thing?
08:15 fr33domlover is it relevant to the server component?
08:31 inhortte joined #darcs
11:16 castlelore joined #darcs
11:23 castlelore joined #darcs
11:44 BitPuffin joined #darcs
12:00 mizu_no_oto joined #darcs
12:17 Big_G joined #darcs
12:49 mizu_no_oto joined #darcs
14:53 pbgc joined #darcs
15:09 alexei_ joined #darcs
15:22 mizu_no_oto joined #darcs
15:49 pbgc joined #darcs
15:49 pointfree fr33domlover, Network.SSH.Connection is only imported in the Client example not the Server example so I figure it is not relevant to the server.
15:52 pointfree fyi, fr33domlover, I'm making a port of darcsden-ssh to ssh-hans. Right now I'm working on having it get the ssh keys from the db instead of ~/.ssh/authorized_keys.
16:40 alexei_ joined #darcs
16:44 mizu_no_oto joined #darcs
17:16 pointfree betabug, a bit of a hack, but you could just do "DARCS_EDITOR=true darcs record" to provide the patch name at the prompt. Not sure about long-comments though. Also, you can specify all these things on the command line too.
17:17 betabug thanks
17:17 betabug yeah, -m is probably the simplest option
17:18 betabug I just liked the previous workflow a lot
17:18 betabug and others on the team complained that in the editor, you can't have a patch name that starts with "#" - we usually have stuff like "#1433 bla bla ticket description fixed"
17:19 betabug because the line that starts with # is obviously taken for a comment now
17:25 pointfree betabug, I've been doing something like P#1433 and pulling only patches with names containing P#1433 spontaneous branches, aka hashtag aggregation: "darcs log -p 'P#1 P#4'"
17:25 Riastradh joined #darcs
17:25 betabug ok
17:26 sm hi betabug!
17:26 betabug well, in any case we just have to adapt our habit a bit, once we don't start the patch name with #, it will be ok
17:26 betabug hey there sm!
17:26 sm that's a bummer.. I start my commits with NNNN (no hash), or I would have noticed that too
17:26 betabug sm: how's life?
17:26 Heffalump betabug: You can use --prompt-long-comment, or put 'record prompt-long-comment'
17:26 Heffalump into ~/.darcs/defaults
17:26 sm fine fine
17:27 betabug Heffalump: oh!
17:27 sm maybe a space before #NNNN works
17:27 betabug I'll try that
17:27 Heffalump (dug out of my response to a mailing list post asking a similar question, so probably right for your case too)
17:27 betabug sm: that would work, but I guess it would cause confusing when doing things like darcs diff --patch
17:28 sm I think most of your --patch uses will still work
17:28 betabug Heffalump: GREAT!!!!!
17:29 betabug Heffalump: drinks are on me, whenever you happen to pass by this part of the world!
17:29 betabug --prompt-long-comment gives me back exactly the previous behavior
17:29 alexei_ joined #darcs
17:31 mizu_no_oto joined #darcs
17:33 Heffalump betabug: :-)
18:11 dolio joined #darcs
18:38 gh_ joined #darcs
18:44 gh_ hi
19:17 Heffalump hi
19:25 gh_ I compiled a list of 2.12-related bugs at  http://tinyurl.com/darcs2-12bugs
19:26 gh_ it's quite arbitrary, some bugs are there because they are bumped from version to version
19:26 gh_ others because I just thought "it would be nice to fix that", but none is really a blocker
19:29 gh_ I'm inclined to attempt an april release of 2.12.0  , and when ghc 8 is released we'll do minor releases
19:29 gh_ it would be cool to have 2.12 out before the may hacking sprint ;)
19:30 pbgc joined #darcs
19:36 sm joined #darcs
19:41 gh_ I'm looking at http://bugs.darcs.net/issue2138  (whatsnew does not show which files are conflicting) and I'd like to propose the folllowing new behaviour:
19:42 gh_ * whatsnew without flags (ie, showing all hunk) stays as before, hence we will still not see which files are conflicting
19:42 gh_ * whatsnew -s shows conflicting files with a !   (eg  M! ./file +10 -4)
19:42 gh_ what do you think?
19:46 gh_ this would only show conflicts between recorded patches, not conflicts between working-before-pull and some new pulled patch
19:47 mizu_no_oto joined #darcs
19:48 Heffalump ok, so showing the hunks means you don't see the M or the M!, makes sense
19:50 gh_ yeah
19:52 castlelore joined #darcs
19:54 pbgc joined #darcs
19:59 fr33domlover pointfree, also worth asking them why they aren't releasing it to Hackage
20:00 fr33domlover (maybe there are issues worth knowing about, security is critical here)
20:03 sm joined #darcs
20:13 Igloo joined #darcs
21:18 gh_ conflict detection makes whatsnew -s noticeably slower...
21:49 gh_ and it works!
23:24 dolio joined #darcs
23:38 mizu_no_oto joined #darcs

| Channels | #darcs index | Today | | Search | Google Search | Plain-Text | summary