[PATCH 1 of 2] commit: save commit message so it's not destroyed by rollback

[Matt Mackall]

On Mon, 2009-11-23 at 13:17 +0100, Adrian Buehlmann wrote:
> On 23.11.2009 13:02, Martin Geisler wrote:
> > Adrian Buehlmann <adrian at cadifra.com> writes:
> > 
> >> On 23.11.2009 10:11, Martin Geisler wrote:
> >>>> It's probably best if Matt just picks a name and ends this discussion.
> >>> I don't think we should not channel every little decision through
> >>> Matt, I'm sure he has better things to do :-)
> >> I'm not entirely sure that Matt would prefer having a .txt suffix,
> >> since it would be clearly a deviation from current naming standards
> >> inside .hg.
> >>
> >> It's surprising though to read that you see the current naming
> >> of the other files inside .hg as broken.
> > 
> > Well, broken is too strong... all I wanted to say is that it would not
> > have hurt anybody if we had added '.ini' or '.txt' from the beginning.
> > 
> > The question is whether we should continue this style for new files too.
> > I can definitely see that it's nice to keep things consistent, but it's
> > also nice to make things ever so slightly easier.
> > 
> > But perhaps it doesn't matter here -- if people use .hg/message as
> > 
> >   hg commit -l .hg/message
> > 
> 
> ...or even simpler just use
> 
> hg ci
> 
> and have the message extension [1] enabled in their ~/.hgrc, which
> will automatically preload .hg/message into their editor.
> 
> [1] http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/MessageExtension

This extension convinces me that 'message' -is- the wrong name. Because
now this pre-existing extension will always be loading your -last-
commit message on your next commit! I'm pretty indifferent to the
extension used. But it should probably have a name like "last-message"
or "message.bak" or the like.

-- 
http://selenic.com : development and support for Mercurial and Linux