Monitoring phase changes
angel.ezquerra at gmail.com
Thu Feb 2 08:49:35 CST 2012
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 3:07 PM, Alain Leufroy <alain.leufroy at logilab.fr> wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Feb 2012, Angel Ezquerra wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 9:44 AM, Pierre-Yves David
>> <pierre-yves.david at logilab.fr> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 08:31:40AM +0100, Angel Ezquerra Moreu wrote:
>> >> I am trying to make TortoiseHg detect phase changes. Steve suggested
>> >> that perhaps we could monitor the files that mercurial uses to store
>> >> the phase information.
>> >> Is this a good idea? If so, which files should we monitor?
>> > This is a good idea.
>> > .hg/store/phaseroots
>> > Do you have screenshot of the current state of phase integration in thg ?
>> > --
>> > Pierre-Yves David
>> This is how it looks like:
>> This corresponds to today's thg stable branch head. This does not
>> integrate a few changes that I've done since then, but it will look
>> essentially the same in the final version.
> Great !
> Although, why are you using a column to display phase name?
> In my view, a dedicated smpbol on the graph may be easier to identify.
> It is also more unobtrusive (phase shall be quite transparent for the user).
> Here is phase intregration in hgview
> Perhaps I'm wrong ... :)
The main reason is that it is much easier to do it this way :-P
I wanted to have something working quickly, and doing it this way was
quite easy. Also, we already use a different symbol to differentiate
between regular revisions and mq patches. Combining that with phase
information (e.g. secret mq vs draft mq patches) in an easy to
understand way is not straight forward. Also, this lets the user hide
the phase information if he does not want to see it at all.
More information about the Mercurial-devel