1 patch for repository http://darcs.net/screened:

patch bcd2ce3941899da6747cabcb0eb5f96af502dabc
Author: Ben Franksen <ben.franksen@online.de>
Date:   Tue Nov 13 17:52:24 CET 2018
  * remove --[no-]packs option
  
  I can't see any reason not to use packs if available in the remote repo.

Attachments

• patch-preview.txt
• remove-___no__packs-option.dpatch
• unnamed

Might it be useful if debugging a problem with cloning (either
as a user or a developer)? e.g. if there's some problem with the
remote packs.

> Might it be useful if debugging a problem with cloning (either
> as a user or a developer)? e.g. if there's some problem with the
> remote packs.

I guess that was the idea. But we fall back to getting patches normally
anyway if anything fails with the packs:

copyCompleteRepoPacked from to verb cloneKind =
    copyCompleteRepoPacked2 from to verb cloneKind
  `catch`
    \(e :: SomeException) -> do
      putStrLn ("Exception while getting patches pack:\n" ++ show e)
      putVerbose verb $ text "Problem while copying patches pack,
copying normally."
      copyCompleteRepoNotPacked from to verb cloneKind

Cheers
Ben

Presumably not all problems would be detected, e.g. if the packs
appeared correct but contained wrong data.

Anyway, I don't mind if it helps clean something up.

> Presumably not all problems would be detected, e.g. if the packs
> appeared correct but contained wrong data.

Hm, yes, that's right.

> Anyway, I don't mind if it helps clean something up.

Not really. I just stumbled over this option and thought: would I ever
want to use --no-packs? You gave a good answer to that, so let's keep it
for now; I'll mark the patch as in-discussion, perhaps I'll come back to it.