[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       darcs-devel
Subject:    Re: [darcs-devel] [darcs #568] wish: mark scripts that will be set
From:       David Roundy <droundy () darcs ! net>
Date:       2005-10-25 12:59:33
Message-ID: 20051025125927.GC14397 () abridgegame ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 05:10:29PM -0400, Mark Stosberg via RT wrote:
> I would like for --set-scripts-executable in combination with 
> --summary to not in the summary which scripts will be set executable. 
>  
> Perhaps: 
>  
>  Ax ./executable/script/to/add.sh 
>   
>  # (does the modification case even matter? Or it is just adding? ) 
>  Mx ./modified/executable.pl 
>  
> Alternatively, if color support is available, color could be used to 
> denote this, using the same colors as colorls for consistency. 
>  
> This change provides a nice confirmation /before/ the action occurs, 
> which saves a reality check afterwards, especially since 
> --set-scripts-executable hasn't been working as expected recently 

Sounds reasonable to me.

Ideally, we'd do this in conjunction with a rewrite of the patch
summarizing code to use a custom WriteableDirectory monad.  This would
allow us to ensure that the code used for the coloring is determined by the
*same* code that decides on the actual executable-bit-setting.  The catch
is that I can't see how to count the lines modified in a WriteableDirectory
monad.  :( But I keep wishing it were possible.

The reason we'd want a WriteableDirectory would be to ensure correctness of
the summary (e.g. to also address issues of file renaming, etc).
-- 
David Roundy
http://www.darcs.net

_______________________________________________
darcs-devel mailing list
darcs-devel@darcs.net
http://www.abridgegame.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/darcs-devel
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]