MQ usability

Peter Williams pwil3058 at
Sat Aug 15 20:09:09 CDT 2009

On 15/08/09 20:35, Isaac Jurado wrote:
> Replying Yann E. MORIN:
>> It should be an internal storage format, but mq is missing a qexport
>> function, which means that to send back a patch, one has to manually
>> copy it from .hg/patches/.
> If a patch is applied, you can use the core "export" command like so:
>      hg export patch_name
> An then, the [defaults] for "export" apply.

But what we want is the ability to export a patch series following the 
widely accepted convention: a tar (or zip) file containing a 'patches' 
directory with a 'series' file and the patches named in that file.  That 
mq's patches directory looks a lot like this (with the addition of a 
'status' file) is no accident as it was designed in full knowledge of 
this convention.  At the moment this export can be done by tarring 
.hg/patches (with the harmless addition of the 'status' file) but having 
a command to do this would be a better solution.  For a start, it would 
decouple mq's internals from its usability and allow changes to be made 
internally without effecting usability.

PS Chapter 12 of "Mercurial, The Definitive Guide" 
(ISBN-978-0-596-80067-3), available to read on-line at 
explains MQ's place in the wider world of patch management.
Peter Williams                                   pwil3058 at

"Learning, n. The kind of ignorance distinguishing the studious."
  -- Ambrose Bierce

More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list