Implementation of Indexes Extension
patrick at mezard.eu
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 gmail.com> 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.
More information about the Mercurial-devel