[PATCH] mq: introduce the qunmanage command

Christian Boos cboos at neuf.fr
Wed May 28 05:35:23 CDT 2008

Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
> ...
> I'd like to one more time state that I still think qpromote is a better name.
> qmanage implies that revisions and patches are the same thing (moving in and out
> of mq control), which is not really the case, certainly not in the minds of new
> users. qpromote makes it clear that a patch in mq is really promoted to
> something else, a Mercurial revision. FWIW, jorendorff and cmason seem to agree
> qpromote is better. Using qpromote would mean retaining qimport as is; I think
> qimport is really a fine name.

One can question which of the two, a MQ managed patch or a regular 
changeset, is the "higher ranked" object. From a MQ centric p.o.v, it's 
certainly a MQ patch. So by looking at the name of the command only, I 
would expect that with 'qpromote', MQ will promote a changeset to a 
patch... but in your idea it's the reverse, so I'm not sure the name 
helps to clarify what is going on.

So I think that 'qmanage'  and 'qunmanage' are far less ambiguous in 
that respect (MQ will manage or unmanage a changeset).

I don't remember if that has been suggested before, but 'qrelease' might 
be another option: you stop editing a patch and transform it in regular 
immutable changeset, freezing it. That command would convey the 
traditional CM meaning of release ("A version of a piece of software 
which has been made public") but also the "release" of control after it 
has been acquired by 'qmanage'.

(Disclaimer: I am not a native speaker, but unmanage doesn't even seem 
to be a proper word)

-- Christian

More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list