[PATCH 0 of 4 ] revert: add support for reverting

Angel Ezquerra angel.ezquerra at gmail.com
Mon Apr 9 17:06:55 CDT 2012


On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 8:30 PM, Matt Mackall <mpm at selenic.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-03-29 at 14:04 +0200, Martin Geisler wrote:
>> Angel Ezquerra <angel.ezquerra at gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> > The first patch refactors the revert function on the commands module,
>> > moving most of its code into cmdutil.revert.
>> >
>> > The second and third patches add support for reverting modified subrepos.
>>
>> Is it 100% clear that 'hg revert' means running 'hg update X' where X is
>> the revision listed in .hgsubstate?
>
> I think we could say 95%. If I discover the library I'm using is too new
> and I revert it at the top level, I probably just want my old library
> back, not a dirty library.
>
>> Btw, I don't think you need to edit .hgsubstate in the working copy. As
>> far as I know, it's not used for anything and commit rewrittes it
>> anyway.
>
> Indeed.

Out of the revisions on this patch series, the first patch that
refactors the revert function on the commands module, moving most of
its code into cmdutil.revert has been pushed.

I believe the last patch needs to be discussed further. However I
don't know if there is anything that I must do to improve the second
and third patches which add support for reverting modified subrepos.

Is there something I must do to improve these patches?

Thanks,

Angel


More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list