[PATCH 3 of 9] update: add error message for dirty non-linearupdate with no revv

Sean Farley sean.michael.farley at gmail.com
Tue Sep 24 15:02:17 CDT 2013


martin at geisler.net writes:

> Siddharth Agarwal <sid0 at fb.com> writes:
>
>> # HG changeset patch
>> # User Siddharth Agarwal <sid0 at fb.com>
>> # Date 1379992050 25200
>> #      Mon Sep 23 20:07:30 2013 -0700
>> # Node ID 3c9d933940fabae7052a1bdad0eb9b47e61fb455
>> # Parent  eddb6f0b067c90910adb968dfb7eb798961e0ab2
>> update: add error message for dirty non-linear update with no rev
>>
>> Previously, the error message for a dirty non-linear update was the
>> same (and relatively unhelpful) whether or not a rev was specified.
>> This patch and an upcoming one will introduce separate, more helpful
>> hints.
>>
>> diff --git a/mercurial/merge.py b/mercurial/merge.py
>> --- a/mercurial/merge.py
>> +++ b/mercurial/merge.py
>> @@ -656,19 +656,21 @@
>>      -c  -C  dirty  rev  |  linear   same  cross
>>       n   n    n     n   |    ok     (1)     x
>>       n   n    n     y   |    ok     ok     ok
>> -     n   n    y     *   |   merge   (2)    (2)
>> +     n   n    y     n   |   merge   (2)    (2)
>> +     n   n    y     y   |   merge   (3)    (3)
>>       n   y    *     *   |    ---  discard  ---
>> -     y   n    y     *   |    ---    (3)    ---
>> +     y   n    y     *   |    ---    (4)    ---
>>       y   n    n     *   |    ---    ok     ---
>> -     y   y    *     *   |    ---    (4)    ---
>> +     y   y    *     *   |    ---    (5)    ---
>>  
>>      x = can't happen
>>      * = don't-care
>>      1 = abort: not a linear update (merge or update --check to force update)
>>      2 = abort: crosses branches (use 'hg merge' to merge or
>>                   use 'hg update -C' to discard changes)
>> -    3 = abort: uncommitted local changes
>> -    4 = incompatible options (checked in commands.py)
>> +    3 = abort: uncommitted changes (commit or update --clean to discard changes)
>
> I know you didn't introduce this behaviour originally and that you're
> just making the existing message more clear. But is this not bad advice?
>
> I almost *never* want to use 'hg update --clean'. It's a bad option
> since it throws away data. Suggesting that people use 'hg revert' would
> be better IMHO since that gives them backup files by default.
>
> Further: if I say 'hg update X', and Mercurial aborts, then I must go
> through the 'hg update "ancestor(., X)"; hg update X' dance. What I
> really need in that situation is for Mercurial to help me move (merge)
> them into the target revision. It is extremely rare that I want to throw
> away my changes with 'hg update --clean'.

To follow-up on Martin's response, using 'hg update' also has the
potential of messing with a bookmark (e.g. moving or deactivating). I
almost always use 'hg revert' solely for this reason.


More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list