[PATCH RFC/WIP] introduce stash command

[Idan Kamara]

On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 3:40 PM, v <voldermort at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> I was referring to
>
> Idan Kamara wrote
> >
> > Ah, yes. Well, if you're already using mq you're advanced enough to use
> > it
> > as a stash so I don't think this is that big of a loss.
> >
> I use mq all the time, and tortoisehg's shelve, because mq isn't an
> appropriate tool for stashing.
>
> Attic's approach seems a lot better. They keep the stashes in an .hg
> directory, and use the recorded parent to rebase when applying on top of a
> different changeset.

And what happens if that parent is no longer there? That's the real problem,
and my stash implementation suffers from it too.

More clearly, the issue is strip. Every stash that had its parent stripped
is
going to fall back to a plain `hg import` and possible .rej files which no
one likes.

Opinions whether the stashes should be kept in patch files or changesets
seems to vary. I think once we have the proper mechanisms to augment
this implementation (changelog filtering + obsolete to replace strip),
then it's going to work and feel better.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial-devel/attachments/20120629/400792e4/attachment.html>