Rethinking mq and pbranch now we have rebase

[Dirkjan Ochtman]

On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 10:46, Matt Mackall <mpm at selenic.com> wrote:
> Well mq wasn't invented in a vacuum, it's part of a long line of tools
> supporting important workflows. In some of these flows, patches (rather
> than changesets) are first class objects that are maintained for
> significant periods of time outside of the target project.
> Backward-compatibility with quilt and rpm's linear model is also quite
> useful.

I understand your position on that, but if you want to maintain that,
I think the argument of not putting something like pbranch in hgext
because it duplicates mq functionality (I'm not sure if that was the
exact argument for not including pbranch) doesn't hold. Peter and I
and many other people, I think, would like to have tools that are more
powerful than mq, and that desire seems mostly incompatible with the
wish to keep quilt/rpm compatibility.

Cheers,

Dirkjan