Rethinking mq and pbranch now we have rebase

[Peter Arrenbrecht]

On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 9:52 AM, Peter Arrenbrecht
<peter.arrenbrecht at gmail.com> wrote:
> Folks, maybe clever use of rebase could lead to a new approach to what
> is currently addressed by mq and pbranch.
>
> We could keep the master copy of the tentative changes in actual
> changesets instead of in patch files (mq) or branch diffs (pbranch).
> So on top of qparent, we'd have csets qbase..qtip. qgoto then simply
> becomes update qN, where qN is the n'th changeset in the queue.
[snip]

Additional thoughts (summarized from #mercurial):

 * Easy to keep multiple queues (just separate forks away from their
respective bases).
 * qguard used to test patches in isolation could be supported by
forks and joins the queue.
 * qguard for different configurations could be supported by forks and
multiple, differently composed joins. Basically, every config has its
own join that pulls in just those forked patches it needs.

Maybe we'd want some kind of octopus join conflict resolution for
these joins (see
http://bitbucket.org/parren/hg-pbranch/issue/37/need-to-resolve-same-conflict-repeatedly#comment-76146).

-parren