[PATCH RFC] update: default update should move as far forward as possible (issue3883)

[Nikolaj Sjujskij]

Den 2013-04-12 21:07:14 skrev Durham Goode <durham at fb.com>:

> On 4/11/13 1:15 PM, "Matt Mackall" <mpm at selenic.com> wrote:
>
>> First, I'm happy to agree that the old message sucks. But it does tell
>> the user that a) they have an issue and b) it's somehow related to
>> branching.
>>
>> But "hg update" doing this:
>>
>> $ hg update
>> 0 files updated, 0 files merged, 0 files removed, 0 files unresolved
>>
>> says "everything's fine" to all but the most clueful, attentive users.
>
> What about something like:
>
> $ hg update
> newer commits exist on a different branch - merge or rebase to reach them
  I think that something like "divergent" is better than "different", and  
"branch" should better be avoided.
One can easily read the message as "on some other (named) branch there's  
something newer" and not recognize as relevant to one's case. What about  
"line of development" or "thread" (as in "forum thread")?

  "merge or rebase to reach them" seems (at least to me) to imply that you  
*should* merge or rebase (and the sooner the better), otherwise those  
commits remain unreachable (at least 'update' command is powerless).

But I'm not native English speaker (yeah, shocking truth), so I may be  
wrong here.