[PATCH] status: add option to show status of files in subrepos

Didly Bom didlybom at gmail.com
Fri Jun 11 07:12:34 CDT 2010


On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 10:38 PM, Matt Mackall <mpm at selenic.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 2010-06-11 at 08:32 +1200, David Mitchell wrote:
> > Thanks Matt,
> >
> >
> >         One of the common complaints about subrepos is
> >         that it's not obvious when a subrepo is modified so commit's
> >         recursive
> >         behavior bites people. So it's not clear that:
> >
> >         M foo
> >         M sub/bar
> >
> >         really gives people enough notice that it's a subrepo that's
> >         changed.
> >         But then:
> >
> >         M foo
> >         M subrepo/
> >
> >         is just weird, so maybe your way is right after all. Opinions?
> >
> >
> > I think perhaps it would make sense to introduce some sort of
> > convention for this, I don't think the current forms are expressive
> > enough. Something similar to one of these perhaps:
> >
> >
> > M foo
> > M (sub)/bar
> > M baz/(sub2)/qux
> >
> >
> > A little arcane, so maybe:
> >
> >
> > M foo
> > S sub M bar
> > S baz/sub2 M qux
>
> Yuck! Let's do it the way you had originally for now.
>

What about simply prepending the "S" flag  to the changes that appear within
a subrepo?

For example:

M foo
S sub
SM sub/bar
SA sub/new_file
SR sub/old_file

If the status output always included the subrepo modification line (e.g. "S
sub"), followed by the modifications to that particular subrepo, I think
that it would be quite easy to spot which changes are in a subrepo and which
are not.

Another case that may need to be considered is what to do when there is a
hierarchy of multiple subrepositories which include each other.

Cheers,

Angel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial-devel/attachments/20100611/0839b689/attachment.htm>


More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list