Marking subrepos in 'hg status'

[Erik Zielke]

2010/10/11 Didly Bom <didlybom at gmail.com>

> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 6:26 PM, Martin Geisler <mg at aragost.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Consider a situaion like this:
>>
>>  $ hg status -S
>>  M dir/x.txt
>>  M sub/a.txt
>>  A dir/y.txt
>>  A sub/b.txt
>>
>> where sub/ is a subrepository and dir/ is just a folder.
>>
>> In some older discussions, people asked for an indicator of when a file
>> is inside a subrepository and when it is inside a directory -- I felt
>> the most natural choice was to write sub/ for the subrepositories.
>>
>> But in the case above, it is hard to see what to write for the line with
>> 'A sub/b.txt' -- should it look like this:
>>
>>  $ hg status -S
>>  M dir/x.txt
>>  M sub/
>>  M sub/a.txt
>>  A dir/y.txt
>>  A sub/
>>  A sub/b.txt
>>
>> That is strange since the subrepo has not been added. An alternative
>> would be to move the recusion up, so that all status lines are kept
>> together for each subrepo:
>>
>>  $ hg status -S
>>  M dir/x.txt
>>  A dir/y.txt
>>  M sub/
>>  M sub/a.txt
>>  A sub/b.txt
>>
>> which I think works better, though it results in scrambled order of
>> added and modified files. What do you guys think?
>>
>
> Martin,
>
> In my opinion, the first option is _really_ confusing. I think that option
> two is much better and also makes much more sense. After all you could say
> that the files changed, added or remove within a subrepo are the details of
> the modification of that subrepo. As such it makes sense to show them
> immediately after the subrepo modification line.
>
> One thing that I would do differently, though, is that the "subrepo line"
> should somehow indicate that the change is within a subrepo. Perhaps an "S"
> could be used instead or in addition to the "M" tag in the "M sub/" line?
>
> Where things would probably break down a little is once you introduce
> subrepos within subrepos. Since there is no "end of subrepo modification"
> line, it may be a bit hard to tell when a change belongs to a subrepo or not
> (it won't be impossible, just harder than it should). Maybe showing all
> subrepo changes at the end would help in that case?
>
> Another option would be to append an "S" tag to the modification status of
> all files contained in a subrepo. In your example the result would be:
>
>
>  $ hg status -S
>  M dir/x.txt
>  A dir/y.txt
>  MS sub/
>  MS sub/a.txt
>  AS sub/b.txt
>
>  This could be repeated for subrepos within subrepos. This has the problem
> that the "status" column would no longer be one char wide, but it would show
> without a doubt which files belong to a subrepo and which do not.
>
> Just my 2 cents. Cheers!
>
> Angel
>
>
Yes. I also think that a special symbol for the subrepo line would make the
output more clear. Isn't the second option suggested already showing the
subrepo changes in the end? And a new subrepo line will mark the end of the
previous sub repository in the output.




> _______________________________________________
> Mercurial-devel mailing list
> Mercurial-devel at selenic.com
> http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial-devel/attachments/20101011/515f9c80/attachment.htm>