New low-level filtering

[Kevin Bullock]

On Jan 30, 2013 2:09 AM, "v" <voldermort at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Matt Mackall wrote
> > Mercurial has always had a fast, numbered index of all changes. It can
> > find any change instantly, by hash or by number. There is no existing
> > notion of an "unreachable changeset" in Mercurial. So hiding change 1000
> > from Mercurial is thus not trivial: code expects that there's a
> > changeset between 999 and 1001.
>
> That's the essence of what I was trying to understand - what are the
> circumstances where changesets 999 and 1001 should be visible, but 1000
> should be filtered? Could 1000 and 1001 be on different branches/heads?

Yes.

pacem in terris / mir / shanti / salaam / heiwa
Kevin R. Bullock
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial-devel/attachments/20130130/2b6ad152/attachment.html>