Received: from spf1.us4.outblaze.com (spf1.us4.outblaze.com [205.158.62.23]) by sdf.lonestar.org (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id iA8NOAgQ007442 for ; Mon, 8 Nov 2004 23:24:10 GMT Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [199.232.76.165]) by spf1.us4.outblaze.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 729DD53CD5 for ; Mon, 8 Nov 2004 23:24:10 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CRJ0D-0007qE-E0 for migo@homemail.com; Mon, 08 Nov 2004 18:32:49 -0500 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CRIzl-0007pd-4r for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Nov 2004 18:32:21 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CRIzk-0007pF-FL for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Nov 2004 18:32:20 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CRIzk-0007ou-5Q for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Nov 2004 18:32:20 -0500 Received: from [205.149.2.136] (helo=xl2.seyza.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.34) id 1CRIqZ-0002J5-3N for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Nov 2004 18:22:52 -0500 Received: from xl2.seyza.com (localhost.seyza.com [127.0.0.1]) by xl2.seyza.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id iA8NRWIb084818; Mon, 8 Nov 2004 15:27:32 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from lord@xl2.seyza.com) Received: (from lord@localhost) by xl2.seyza.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id iA8NRVMB084815; Mon, 8 Nov 2004 15:27:31 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from lord) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 15:27:31 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200411082327.iA8NRVMB084815@xl2.seyza.com> From: Thomas Lord To: stephen@xemacs.org In-reply-to: <877jowbl8w.fsf@tleepslib.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> (stephen@xemacs.org) Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: darcs vs tla References: <20041107234609.7bf0abfe@delta.hk.office.outblaze.com> <877jowbl8w.fsf@tleepslib.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> Cc: gnu-arch-users@gnu.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com, timw@outblaze.com X-BeenThere: gnu-arch-users@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: a discussion list for all things arch-ish List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org Errors-To: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org Status: RO Content-Length: 1608 Lines: 38 On the topic of darcs, especially the part of this thread talking about the notion of commuting patches by variance adjusting and building merge intellegence out of that ...... How much experience is there with the merging practices that result from that approach? On first principles I'm highly skeptical of it because variance adjustment, unlike first-order diff and patch, has a terrible relationship to program /semantics/. In other words, while diff and patch are strictly text based, nevertheless, on a bunch of less formal, and admittedly less guaranteed levels, they do very well for capturing changes to a C program in a form that (for practical purposes) captures the /meaning/ of the changes. So a diff on some file is a not bad approximation of a logical statement of how the code in that file changed. But once you kick in variance adjustment, the basis of the darcs commutative-patches hacks, i have severe doubts about how well you're sticking to that lucky pun of textual diffs and logical summaries of changes. So: does Darcs' merge operators (the deep distinction it has from arch) really "add value"? at scale? What's up with those? Does anyone actually /know/? Next: suppose those operators /are/ just the bee's-knees and we sorely miss them in arch. Don't they map onto arch archives in some interesting way? I rather suspect that they do.... -t _______________________________________________ Gnu-arch-users mailing list Gnu-arch-users@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users GNU arch home page: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/