pwil3058 at bigpond.net.au
Sun Aug 23 08:19:54 CDT 2009
On 23/08/09 20:29, Patrick Mézard wrote:
> Peter Williams a écrit :
>> On 11/08/09 02:25, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
>>> - possibly remove qsave/qrestore as well, since no one seems to use
>>> them (and many people get confused by them).
>> qsave and its usefulness in updating ones patches when the underlying
>> code changes (see page 197 of "Mercurial, The Definitive Guide",
>> ISBN-978-0-596-80067-3) is the MQ feature that most distinguishes from
>> other patch management systems (such as the very popular "quilt"
>> <http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/quilt>). So it would be a big
>> mistake to remove it.
> Could you elaborate on how you use qsave exactly?
> Are you talking about rebasing patches with the complicated qsave/qpush -m dance?
Yes. That's what the reference I gave refers to.
I've since been made aware of and tried rebase. I think that it's a
better long term solution (than the dance) but still has some problems
(e.g. it triggers inappropriate hooks) - see my e-mail of 17/08/2009
16:52 (in this thread) for details.
I also suggested that a special version of rebase (e.g. qrebase) could
be used to replace qsave (which would also make qrestore unnecessary).
Its interface could be considerably simpler than rebase's because less
things would need to be specified.
Peter Williams pwil3058 at bigpond.net.au
"Learning, n. The kind of ignorance distinguishing the studious."
-- Ambrose Bierce
More information about the Mercurial-devel