69 messages in com.selenic.mercurial-develRe: [PATCH 4 of 4] summary: show if p...| From | Sent On | Attachments |
|---|---|---|
| Martin Geisler | May 7, 2010 10:33 am | |
| Dirkjan Ochtman | May 7, 2010 10:37 am | |
| Matt Mackall | May 7, 2010 10:59 am | |
| Martin Geisler | May 7, 2010 11:14 am | |
| Matt Mackall | May 7, 2010 11:46 am | |
| Dirkjan Ochtman | May 7, 2010 1:14 pm | |
| Gilles Moris | May 8, 2010 12:10 am | |
| Martin Geisler | May 8, 2010 1:31 am | |
| Martin Geisler | May 8, 2010 1:34 am | |
| Martin Geisler | May 8, 2010 1:48 am | |
| Martin Geisler | May 8, 2010 2:09 am | |
| Gilles Moris | May 8, 2010 3:50 am | |
| Martin Geisler | May 8, 2010 1:10 pm | |
| Gilles Moris | May 9, 2010 9:33 am | |
| Gilles Moris | May 9, 2010 1:49 pm | |
| Gilles Moris | May 9, 2010 1:49 pm | |
| Gilles Moris | May 9, 2010 1:49 pm | |
| Gilles Moris | May 9, 2010 1:49 pm | |
| Gilles Moris | May 9, 2010 1:49 pm | |
| Matt Mackall | May 9, 2010 2:36 pm | |
| Matt Mackall | May 9, 2010 2:43 pm | |
| Matt Mackall | May 9, 2010 2:45 pm | |
| Matt Mackall | May 9, 2010 2:47 pm | |
| Martin Geisler | May 9, 2010 4:11 pm | |
| Dirkjan Ochtman | May 9, 2010 10:50 pm | |
| Gilles Moris | May 9, 2010 11:31 pm | |
| Gilles Moris | May 9, 2010 11:49 pm | |
| Matt Mackall | May 10, 2010 12:04 am | |
| Gilles Moris | May 10, 2010 12:37 am | |
| Gilles Moris | May 10, 2010 12:37 am | |
| Matt Mackall | May 10, 2010 12:38 am | |
| Matt Mackall | May 10, 2010 12:58 am | |
| Sune Foldager | May 11, 2010 2:02 am | |
| Sune Foldager | May 11, 2010 2:08 am | |
| Sune Foldager | May 11, 2010 2:14 am | |
| Sune Foldager | May 11, 2010 2:20 am | |
| Matt Mackall | May 11, 2010 3:53 pm | |
| Matt Mackall | May 11, 2010 3:56 pm | |
| Gilles Moris | May 12, 2010 12:52 am | |
| Gilles Moris | May 12, 2010 1:15 am | |
| Gilles Moris | May 12, 2010 1:15 am | |
| Gilles Moris | May 12, 2010 1:15 am | |
| Gilles Moris | May 12, 2010 1:15 am | |
| Gilles Moris | May 12, 2010 1:15 am | |
| Gilles Moris | May 12, 2010 5:17 am | |
| Augie Fackler | May 12, 2010 7:35 am | |
| Matt Mackall | May 12, 2010 8:33 am | |
| Matt Mackall | May 12, 2010 8:34 am | |
| Matt Mackall | May 12, 2010 8:34 am | |
| Matt Mackall | May 12, 2010 8:55 am | |
| Gilles Moris | May 12, 2010 2:33 pm | |
| Gilles Moris | May 13, 2010 7:31 am | |
| Matt Mackall | May 13, 2010 1:48 pm | |
| Martin Geisler | May 17, 2010 1:09 am | |
| Martin Geisler | May 17, 2010 1:22 am | |
| Rafael Villar Burke (Pachi) | May 17, 2010 2:07 am | |
| Augie Fackler | May 17, 2010 5:57 am | |
| Martin Geisler | May 17, 2010 6:56 am | |
| Augie Fackler | May 17, 2010 7:46 am | |
| Martin Geisler | May 17, 2010 8:13 am | |
| Augie Fackler | May 17, 2010 8:41 am | |
| Gilles Moris | May 19, 2010 8:00 am | |
| Martin Geisler | May 19, 2010 3:53 pm | |
| Martin Geisler | May 19, 2010 3:58 pm | |
| Augie Fackler | May 24, 2010 5:15 am | |
| Peter Arrenbrecht | May 26, 2010 6:23 am | |
| Rafael Fernández López | Jun 3, 2010 5:35 am | |
| Peter Arrenbrecht | Jun 3, 2010 6:14 am | |
| Martin Geisler | Jun 4, 2010 12:18 am |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH 4 of 4] summary: show if parents are closed heads | |
|---|---|---|
| From: | Matt Mackall (mp...@selenic.com) | |
| Date: | May 11, 2010 3:53:29 pm | |
| List: | com.selenic.mercurial-devel | |
On Tue, 2010-05-11 at 11:20 +0200, Sune Foldager wrote:
On 10-05-2010 09:59, Matt Mackall wrote:
On Mon, 2010-05-10 at 09:38 +0200, Gilles Moris wrote:
# HG changeset patch # User Gilles Moris <gill...@free.fr> # Date 1273438087 -7200 # Node ID 3e17baf3a45861ee1c8e3c9f0dce46afa1570c99 # Parent 4f227e0671ba95e075ecdc2d2a6b5f3f0072e5bf summary: show if parents are closed heads
I think this ought to go on the branch: line instead.
I'm worried about that, since it will state incorrect information (or at least confusing) for people with >1 head per named branch. In that case, the branch will not be closed, but only this branch-head. It's of course hard to put "(current branch-head closed)" in a shorter sentence :-p.
Summary already sticks hints in parentheses sometimes on most lines, and might start sticking them elsewhere. Whereas log has had a completely rigid format for the parent line for 5 years. The only thing we've ever changed there is adding branch:. That was introduced at the same time as named branches and so only affects folks who start using named branches, while old repos and their users' tools/scripts keep working.
Analogously, people who don't use --close-branch won't be affected by this, right?.
Yes. The difference is that people are already using --close-branch as it was introduced quite a while ago and are in danger of encountering new pain from just upgrading, whereas named branches and the branch: line in log were introduced simultaneously and thus couldn't break existing work flows.
-- Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.
_______________________________________________ Mercurial-devel mailing list Merc...@selenic.com http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel