[RFC] New core command: graft

Antoine Pitrou solipsis at pitrou.net
Mon Oct 10 12:16:29 CDT 2011

On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 12:00:59 -0500
Matt Mackall <mpm at selenic.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-10-10 at 18:09 +0200, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> > On Sun, 09 Oct 2011 17:23:38 -0500
> > Matt Mackall <mpm at selenic.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > Among other things, I'm looking for feedback on the UI and what features
> > > are critical. Right now, it copies the details of grafted changesets
> > > (user/date/description) verbatim. That's an ok default, but it seems
> > > like we'd like to be able to tweak that.
> > 
> > I think ability to edit the changeset message is a definite plus
> > (sometimes you want to mention specific problems you had when doing the
> > graft, or explain some differences between the two changesets).
> > For me "hg graft" should not commit by default, because a patch
> > applying fine is not enough to guarantee the result it actually ok. In
> > our case (CPython) we want to compile and run the test suite before
> > committing (at least the tests likely to be affected).
> Which gets us back to 'original author/date/description are now lost'.

They are not if you keep track of the grafted changeset id, and display
its id as part of repository-inspecting commands (such as hg log).
Since you can only graft changesets from the same repo there shouldn't
be any problem.

The original description can also be presented by default when "hg
commit" invokes an editor.

> We don't have that for transplant and rebase, so I'm going to defer that
> discussion until after the 2.0 release. The code freeze is this weekend.




More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list