darcs-style cherry-picking of changes to commit ?

[John A Meinel]

Simon Michael wrote:
> Good evening all.. I'm a happy darcs user, checking out bzr which also
> looks great. Thanks for creating it.
> 
> On #bzr I got this help:
> 
> sm: does bzr support cherry-picking changes within a file as well as
> darcs ?
> ...
> taaz: i think sm is asking about the neat feature of darcs asking about
> each individual line grouping diff in a file as you commit.
> taaz: so you can just commit partial changes to a file
> sm: yes that's what I meant
> ...
> robey: yeah i think the closest bzr behavior is "shelve"
> ...
> robey: but the shelve ui is a bit wonky
> 
> and was advised to raise it here also. I wondered if darcs still has
> some algorithmic edge which permits this feature ? Or is it easy enough
> to replicate this feature in bzr by integrating shelve more tightly ?

Actually, it is more of a philosophical reason. In general it isn't good
form to commit stuff that hasn't been tested. Because you don't really
know that what you are committing makes sense.

So instead of having things committed to the permanent record (which
darcs doesn't really have anyway), we went with shelve which lets you
put aside changes temporarily, so that you can test the rest. And then
you can commit that, and then pull the changes back off the shelf.

I think it is a better work flow, because of the opportunity to actually
 review the effect of the changes.

I think the shelve ui has been under review recently, and I think it has
been cleaned up a bit. (At least the question has been clarified).

John
=:->

> 
> Best,
> -Simon Michael
> 
> 
> 


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20051202/51379188/attachment.pgp