$ darcs unrecord --matches='author dagit'
Mon Sep  1 23:08:33 PDT 2008  Jason Dagit <dagit@codersbase.com>
  * make commands use RIO
Shall I unrecord this patch? (1/63)  [ynWvpxdaqjk], or ? for help: y
Mon Sep  1 17:32:54 PDT 2008  Jason Dagit <dagit@codersbase.com>
  * resolve conflicts
Shall I unrecord this patch? (2/63)  [ynWvpxdaqjk], or ? for help: y
Sat Aug 30 10:47:22 PDT 2008  David Roundy <droundy@darcs.net>
  * fix bug in makeRelative.
Shall I unrecord this patch? (3/63)  [ynWsfvpxdaqjk], or ? for help:

The last patch listed is not by author dagit.

On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 22:29:57 -0000, Jason Dagit wrote:
> The last patch listed is not by author dagit.

I'm too tired to find the corresponding bug right now, but this is
another UI problem.

That last patch is later depended on by some other patch by author dagit
which you /may/ want to unrecord, but in order to unrecord that patch,
you'd have to also unrecord David's

On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 23:43:49 +0100, Eric Y. Kow wrote:
> That last patch is later depended on by some other patch by author dagit
> which you /may/ want to unrecord, but in order to unrecord that patch,
> you'd have to also unrecord David's

Also, I wonder if darcs pull --no-deps could be usefully adapted

On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 6:29 PM, Jason Dagit <bugs@darcs.net> wrote:
> $ darcs unrecord --matches='author dagit'
> Mon Sep  1 23:08:33 PDT 2008  Jason Dagit <dagit@codersbase.com>
>  * make commands use RIO
> Shall I unrecord this patch? (1/63)  [ynWvpxdaqjk], or ? for help: y
> Mon Sep  1 17:32:54 PDT 2008  Jason Dagit <dagit@codersbase.com>
>  * resolve conflicts
> Shall I unrecord this patch? (2/63)  [ynWvpxdaqjk], or ? for help: y
> Sat Aug 30 10:47:22 PDT 2008  David Roundy <droundy@darcs.net>
>  * fix bug in makeRelative.
> Shall I unrecord this patch? (3/63)  [ynWsfvpxdaqjk], or ? for help:
>
> The last patch listed is not by author dagit.

Why do you consider this a bug? I consider it a feature that you can
use unrecord --match to unrecord both a patch and any patches that
depend on it.

David

On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 7:19 AM, David Roundy <bugs@darcs.net> wrote:
>
> David Roundy <daveroundy@gmail.com> added the comment:
>
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 6:29 PM, Jason Dagit <bugs@darcs.net> wrote:
>> $ darcs unrecord --matches='author dagit'
>> Mon Sep  1 23:08:33 PDT 2008  Jason Dagit <dagit@codersbase.com>
>>  * make commands use RIO
>> Shall I unrecord this patch? (1/63)  [ynWvpxdaqjk], or ? for help: y
>> Mon Sep  1 17:32:54 PDT 2008  Jason Dagit <dagit@codersbase.com>
>>  * resolve conflicts
>> Shall I unrecord this patch? (2/63)  [ynWvpxdaqjk], or ? for help: y
>> Sat Aug 30 10:47:22 PDT 2008  David Roundy <droundy@darcs.net>
>>  * fix bug in makeRelative.
>> Shall I unrecord this patch? (3/63)  [ynWsfvpxdaqjk], or ? for help:
>>
>> The last patch listed is not by author dagit.
>
> Why do you consider this a bug? I consider it a feature that you can
> use unrecord --match to unrecord both a patch and any patches that
> depend on it.

I wanted to unrecord my patches not yours.  Instead I had to skip
through many patches to find it and then unrecord it.  It's good that
this is safe but when I'm picking the patch I want the filtering to
restrict the high level view to exactly that which I'm filtering on.
If the patch I end up picking has dependencies I didn't pick I think
that's a better time to show me.

filtering must be bugging and then I'm afraid to use it.

I hope that clarifies.

Jason

On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 12:38:01 -0700, Jason Dagit wrote:
> I wanted to unrecord my patches not yours.  Instead I had to skip
> through many patches to find it and then unrecord it.  It's good that
> this is safe but when I'm picking the patch I want the filtering to
> restrict the high level view to exactly that which I'm filtering on.
> If the patch I end up picking has dependencies I didn't pick I think
> that's a better time to show me.

I think we want darcs unrecord --no-deps
See darcs help pull --no-deps

On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 08:43:49PM +0100, Eric Y. Kow wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 12:38:01 -0700, Jason Dagit wrote:
> > I wanted to unrecord my patches not yours.  Instead I had to skip
> > through many patches to find it and then unrecord it.  It's good
> > that this is safe but when I'm picking the patch I want the
> > filtering to restrict the high level view to exactly that which
> > I'm filtering on.  If the patch I end up picking has dependencies
> > I didn't pick I think that's a better time to show me.
>
> I think we want darcs unrecord --no-deps
> See darcs help pull --no-deps

That would work.  But the default should be to include the deps,
for the same reason that the default is to be interactive.  Users will
be more confused if they try

darcs unrecord -p buggy-patch

and it simply claims that the patch doesn't exist, when

darcs changes -p buggy-patch

clearly show that the patch does exist.

David

I see that we now have a darcs unrecord --no-deps feature, so I'm closing this