Implementation of Indexes Extension

Patrick Mézard patrick at
Wed Feb 15 07:04:35 CST 2012

Le 15/02/12 13:45, Arne Babenhauserheide a écrit :
> Hi Dennis,
> At Tue, 14 Feb 2012 23:29:54 +0100, Dennis Brakhane wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 5:09 PM, Alexander Sauta 
>> <demosito at> wrote:
>>> I've briefly looked through the description and didn't quite get 
>>> why index concept is better than mq. I mean, users like
>>> Mercurial for the absence of
>>> There are two things the the index does better than MQ:
>> 1. The ability to add only certain changes to a file (qrefresh only
>> supports adding everything)
> I think there is qrecord for that.

qrecord is similar to qnew, not qrefresh.

To be fair, Idan submitted patches about that last year, for instance:

>> 2. The ability to incrementally increase or decrease the stuff
>> that is contained in the changes:
> About easy decreasing I don’t know (you need to ask someone who 
> actually uses mq in his workflows). Increasing is simple: Just add a 
> new patch to the queue and fold the patches in the end.

As someone pointed out, before qfold you need to qpop. To qpop you need to have a clean working directory or use --force. Now, we want to pick some changes to files possibly already tracked in the applied patch, which rules out both.

Patrick Mézard

More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list