Re: [darcs-users] Re: [BK] upgrade will be needed

David Brown
2005-02-21T18:34:12Z

On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 07:41:54AM -0500, David Roundy wrote:

> The catch is that then we'd have to implement a smart server to keep users
> from having to download the entire history with each update. That's not a
> fundamentally hard issue, but it would definitely degrade darcs' ease of
> use, besides putting additional load on the server. So if something like
> this were implemented, I think it would definitely have to be as an
> optional format.
>
> Also, we couldn't actually store the data in CVS/SCCS format, since in
> darcs a patch to a single file isn't uniquely determined by two states of
> that file. But storing separately the patches relevant to different files
> would definitely be an optimization worth considering.

What about just a cache file that records, for each "file" which patches
affect it. Now that I think about it, this is a little tricky, since I'm
not sure what that file would be called. It would be easy to do for
filenames in the current version.

Dave