> Note: Starting from the second patch on, I'm talking about about *extra*
> dependencies (instead of *explicit*) as this is how they are called in the
> help for `record`. Not sure if one of the terms correctly describe them,
> anyway.

5 patches for repository http://darcs.net/screened:

patch 603221e252ff24792e75437f2d349cc090287bc8
Author: Gian Piero Carrubba <gpiero@rm-rf.it>
Date:   Wed Jan  3 23:16:24 CET 2018
  * Resolve issue2555: include explicit dependencies in the output of
`log -v`

patch 0d0aa1100acab76019a0993e3efe3b573038e757
Author: Gian Piero Carrubba <gpiero@rm-rf.it>
Date:   Wed Jan  3 23:23:34 CET 2018
  * Show extra dependencies in `log -v` similarly to patch primitives

patch d2ac28369623053a97c13ad6e7d28c026ecc1370
Author: Gian Piero Carrubba <gpiero@rm-rf.it>
Date:   Thu Jan  4 09:33:19 CET 2018
  * Include extra dependencies in the output of `log -s --human`

patch b5714dce1f7ce52681516d020f70ee8b5432c741
Author: Gian Piero Carrubba <gpiero@rm-rf.it>
Date:   Fri Jan 12 18:50:58 CET 2018
  * Include extra dependencies in the output of `log -s --xml`

patch 346835da5ad26c2a207bbf19e59f4e74a5092100
Author: Gian Piero Carrubba <gpiero@rm-rf.it>
Date:   Mon Jan 15 17:18:18 CET 2018
  * Include <extra_dependencies> element in XML schema

Attachments

• resolve-issue2555_-include-explicit-dependencies-in-the-output-of-_log-_v_.dpatch

This bundle looks correct; now with "log -v" one directly sees the
explicit dependencies of each patch (before it was only when pressing
"v"), moreover the output of "log -v --machine" is maintained (shows the
exact contents of patch on disk).

Yay!

BTW, I think 'explicit dependency' is the correct terminology: they are
explicitly given by the user, in contrast to implicit dependencies which
are automatic due to failing commute. This term is also used in most of
the comments in the code see e.g. src/Darcs/Patch/Depends.hs line 77 ff.

The help for the record command should be changed accordingly.

Just noticed I didn't comment the patches, so doing now. Also, didn't
consider in the current workflow the bundle had to be screened as a
whole, instead of being divided into single patches.  


> patch 603221e252ff24792e75437f2d349cc090287bc8
> Author: Gian Piero Carrubba <gpiero@rm-rf.it>
> Date:   Wed Jan  3 23:16:24 CET 2018
>   * Resolve issue2555: include explicit dependencies in the output of
> `log -v`

This the single patch that solves the issue. All other patches are
superfluous wrt the issue.

> patch 0d0aa1100acab76019a0993e3efe3b573038e757
> Author: Gian Piero Carrubba <gpiero@rm-rf.it>
> Date:   Wed Jan  3 23:23:34 CET 2018
>   * Show extra dependencies in `log -v` similarly to patch primitives

This changes the display for explicit dependencies from:

Explicit dependencies:
  patch 3a4a0d7430e2d6b690e09a608b2fd263a17c6df9
    * remove pre-cabal flag DISABLE_TESTING

to

depend patch 3a4a0d7430e2d6b690e09a608b2fd263a17c6df9
    * remove pre-cabal flag DISABLE_TESTING

in order to let them appear similar to the way hunks and file
moves/removals are displayed. (The examples are for patch
4a4266a2df8af71005ce09fe3c539b3e3082e1d8). I like this output
(especially when colours are on), but not sure it is something all agree
with.

> patch d2ac28369623053a97c13ad6e7d28c026ecc1370
> Author: Gian Piero Carrubba <gpiero@rm-rf.it>
> Date:   Thu Jan  4 09:33:19 CET 2018
>   * Include extra dependencies in the output of `log -s --human`

This displays the explicit dependencies also in the output of log
--summary (--human), where I like to see them. Debatable, this is just
my preference. The output would be:

patch 4a4266a2df8af71005ce09fe3c539b3e3082e1d8
Author: Guillaume Hoffmann <guillaumh@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed Jan 24 14:19:16 CET 2018
  * remove pre-cabal flag DISABLE_TESTING part 2

    D patch 3a4a0d7430e2d6b690e09a608b2fd263a17c6df9
      * remove pre-cabal flag DISABLE_TESTING
    M ./harness/test.hs -2

Chose 'D' for dependency but not sure this is the best choice. I think I
remember ages ago (darcs 1.x ?) 'D' was used for something else (I guess
in the output of `whatsnew`). Would 'X' (eXplicit) be a better choice?

> patch b5714dce1f7ce52681516d020f70ee8b5432c741
> Author: Gian Piero Carrubba <gpiero@rm-rf.it>
> Date:   Fri Jan 12 18:50:58 CET 2018
>   * Include extra dependencies in the output of `log -s --xml`
> 
> patch 346835da5ad26c2a207bbf19e59f4e74a5092100
> Author: Gian Piero Carrubba <gpiero@rm-rf.it>
> Date:   Mon Jan 15 17:18:18 CET 2018
>   * Include <extra_dependencies> element in XML schema

These display the explicit dependencies also in the xml output. Would
amend the latter as per Ben's comment (explicit instead of extra).

Explicit dependencies still not included in the output of `log --summary
--machine` as it is currently broken (displays the `--verbose` output
instead of the `--summary` one). Btw, `log --xml --verbose` is also
broken as it displays the same output as `--summary`. Not sure anyway
about what the correct output should be.

gpiero, what about your follow-up bundle? I would like us to incorporate
these changes in the next release.

Here is the trivial patch that renames "extra dependencies" into
"explicit dependencies" (the latter is indeed the termused exerywhere).

As for whether D is the appropiate letter for explicit dependencies in
darcs log -s, at first I thought it would evoke "Delete", but darcs uses
R for "Remove" so I kind of got used to it.

As for the issue mentionned in Gian Piero's last message I created
http://bugs.darcs.net/issue2586 .

I'm accepting the whole bundle.

Attachments

• use-term-explicit-dependencies-instead-of-extra-dependencies.dpatch