I hate this:

What is the patch name? foo
Do you want to add a long comment? [yn]d
Invalid response, try again!
Do you want to add a long comment? [yn]a
Invalid response, try again!
Do you want to add a long comment? [yn]r
Invalid response, try again!
Do you want to add a long comment? [yn]c
Invalid response, try again!
Do you want to add a long comment? [yn]n

and I think it's the sort of thing that makes people hate darcs 
interactive UI.  I happen to like darcs interactiveness, but think we 
can do better.

I think --edit-long-comments should be the default.  But I don't know 
whether it makes sense for the general case, or if I'm only saying that 
because I'm used to Darcs.

The patch for this would be very easy, maybe try and see?

On 27/12/2011 22:12, Eric Kow wrote:

> I think --edit-long-comments should be the default.  But I don't know 
> whether it makes sense for the general case, or if I'm only saying that 
> because I'm used to Darcs.

I think --edit-long-comments as the default would be annoying, usually
my changes have one-line comments.

Ganesh

What if darcs were just to send you straight to the editor without 
asking for the short patch name?

Bah, maybe that'd be surprising.  I guess I'm wrong, and without any 
research to back me up (or feedback, etc), it'd all be guessing wildly.  
Either agree to experiment or just leave it alone, I guess :-/

--edit-long-commend fires the default text editor without warning,
which may surprise people that never use command line editors.

And then, not entering any long comment prompts "File content did not
change. Continue anyway? [yn]", which is problematic but I guess that
can be changed accordingly.

I'm rather happy with the current behaviour.

Guillaume

I guess you're right.  Hrmph, I wish we could kill the confirmations :-) 
[the file content not changed one is dead for record in recent darcs, but 
still needed for send].