[PATCH 0 of 5] histedit: fix some problems

[Augie Fackler]

On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 9:17 AM, FUJIWARA Katsunori
<foozy at lares.dti.ne.jp> wrote:
>
> At Mon, 26 Aug 2013 09:50:44 -0400,
> Augie Fackler wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 04:41:47PM +0900, FUJIWARA Katsunori wrote:
>> > This patch series fixes some problems around histedit extension.
>> >
>> > For patch #5, I chose editing only outgoings which are ancestors of
>> > working directory, when there are some roots in outgoings. But should
>> > I choose aborting in such situation ?
>>
>> Not sure what you're asking here, can you rephrase and/or provide a diagram?
>
> I'm just afraid that aborting "hg histedit" was suitable for Mercurial
> philosophy than automatic choice of target revisions, if there are
> multiple roots in outgoing revisions.
>
> For example, if it could be assumed that users often misunderstand
> about outgoing (and histedit target) revisions when there are multiple
> roots in them, convenience of target revision choice shouldn't be so
> important. "hg histedit" should be aborted to avoid confusion.


If I understand this, you're asking if 'hg histedit --outgoing' should
be the same as 'hg histedit outgoing()' or 'hg histedit "outgoing()
and ::."'. The answer is that it should be 'hg histedit outgoing()',
and that if there are multiple outgoing roots, we should abort.