hg update without -C to switch branches

[Florent Guillaume]

Hi,

Would there be opposition to not having the
   update spans branches, use 'hg merge' or 'hg update -C' to lose changes
message when you update to a different branch but there are no local 
changes?

I find the current behavior very harmful when working with named 
branches. I have to tell my users to do "hg up -C" to switch branches, 
but using -C all the time is a very bad habit that could lead to loss of 
local changes when done at the wrong time. I'd much rather have them do 
"hg up otherbanch", and if there *are* local changes then update would 
output its message above and stop.

Thanks,
Florent

-- 
Florent Guillaume, Director of R&D, Nuxeo
Open Source Enterprise Content Management (ECM)
http://www.nuxeo.com   http://www.nuxeo.org   +33 1 40 33 79 87