Obsolete Terminology

[Jason Harris]

On Aug 6, 2012, at 4:47 PM, Pierre-Yves David wrote:

> On Sat, Aug 04, 2012 at 12:41:26PM +0200, Jason Harris wrote:
>>> Compared to mq, the original 1 changeset still exists, and 2 was merged as
>>> 5 instead of being patched.
>> 
>> In this neat demo, we can see the extinct changeset:
>> 
>>    amends dcb5307c155793f5a3b78b2de7c9f7c0a07383f2
>> 
>> I can imagine when users actually want to see extinct changesets to see how
>> the history has evolved (maybe if they have problems stabilizing, etc.)
>> having the extinct history cluttered by implementation artifacts is not the
>> best. Can / will this be fixed / changed when everything is finalized?
> 
> This is an implementation details that I expect to get removed a some point.
> This is not desirable to expose it to the user but I've much more urgent stuff
> to tacle first.
> 
> Cheer,

Cool. Just as long as it's recognized all around that in the end this should disappear... :)

Thanks!
   Jas