[PATCH] [mq] addchangegroupe finalize mq patches if changeset children are added

[Martin Geisler]

Gilles Moris <gilles.moris at free.fr> writes:

> On Saturday 12 March 2011 07:30:46 pm David Pierre-Yves wrote:
>> On 12 mars 11, at 18:57, Pierre-Yves David wrote:
>> > With this change, any mq patches getting standard changeset
>> > descendant get
>> > finalize uncondfitionnaly. Status messages are displayed for the user.
>>
>> There is actually Two sane possibilities to handle the situation.
>>
>> - Reject pull, highlight the harmful situation and suggest finish (as
>> djc suggests)
>> - Accept pull and finish inconsistent patches (with children) (as
>> implemented)
>>
>> And two mixed solution.
>>
>> - Reject unless -f is provided (and finish inconsistent patches).
>> - Prompt the user to either accept the pull (finishing inconsistent
>> patches) or reject it.
>>
>> The most problematic part of automatically finishing mq patches is
>> that finishing a patch is not easy to rollback. Patches files à
>> remove from .hg/patches/, series files are modified and revision can
>> only be reimported with qimport (loosing patch name information)
>
> I don't like tools to take decision on my behalf. I want to decide
> what to do with it because I am the one who knows the workflow that
> leads there. Possibly attempting a dry-run merge of my queue or my be
> I just made a mistake.

There is nothing to merge -- we are talking about the case where the
changesets created by your patches already exists in some other
repository. Not just similar changesets, but the exact
bit-for-bit-identical changesets.

Additionally, we are talking about the case where you pull in new things
*on top* of your patches. In that case there is a strong argument for
finalizing your patches: someone else has gotten hold of them and have
based work on top of them. You can therefore no longer refresh your
patches without messing things up for him -- having to 'hg qimport' the
changesets again does not seem too much to ask for in that case.

The only thing you lose is the patch names. I know some people spend
time chosing their patch names and wont like to lose them. But are these
the same people who carelessly publish their patches as a repository and
subsequently pull from it?

-- 
Martin Geisler

aragost Trifork
Professional Mercurial support
http://aragost.com/en/services/mercurial/blog/