No subject


Wed Jan 7 15:56:51 UTC 2009


>> >
>> > We should probably not hear at all about closed branch heads unless
>> > we
>> > do something special.
>> >
>>
>> Agreed, I think that:
>>   a) "hg heads" should not show closed heads without a flag.
>>      (any opinions on what the flag should be?)
>
>Perhaps --closed/-c? This should probably implemented as a flag down to
>the branchheads function that defaults to False.
>
>   b) "hg merge" should ignore closed heads when the user does not
>      explicitly give it a revision.
>
>Yup.


I wasn't reading your words carefully enough. You wrote "branch heads"
and I wrote "heads". The flag existed on both functions so I changed 
both at once. Sorry for the mess.

I think that the best approach to fix my mistakes would be to totally remove
the closed argument to heads. Then, the code will match the definition. Any
function that cares about closed branch heads _must_ use
repo.branchheads only. 
Does that sound correct?


> 
> Here are all the definitions again for comparison:
> 
> head: a changeset that has no children
> 
> branch: the set of all changesets with the same branch name
> 
> branch head: a changeset in a branch that has no children in that branch
> (not the same as head!)
> 
> active branch head: a branch head that is also a head
> 
> inactive branch head: a branch head that has a child not in the same
> branch
> 
> closed branch head: a branch head with a closed marker
> 
> closed branch: a branch with only closed heads
> 
> 
> -- 
> http://selenic.com : development and support for Mercurial and Linux
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mercurial-devel mailing list
> Mercurial-devel at selenic.com
> http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
> 


More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list