Help designing the evolve UI

Colin Caughie c.caughie at gmail.com
Thu Apr 17 11:29:11 CDT 2014


On 4/17/2014 7:27 AM, Pierre-Yves David wrote:
>
>
> On 04/17/2014 10:14 AM, Greg Ward wrote:
>> On 17 April 2014, Angel Ezquerra said:
>>> One of my biggest issues with the current evolve UI is that a plain "hg
>>> evolve" only evolves one revision. This surprised me a lot when I first
>>> tried the evolve command and it still annoys me every time I use it.
>>
>> Me too. I've just gotten in the habit of always running "hg evolve -a".
>> The user guide I'm working on always says "hg evolve --all". Hmmm.
>>
>> +0.9 to making --all the default. Does it make any sense for
>> "hg evolve -r REV" to evolve a single rev? Or maybe "hg evolve --next"
>> to do what "hg evolve" currently does?
>
> --rev is something I've beed thinking for a long time. This would got 
> well along flags to select the troubles to fix. (waving at Jordi)
>
> Switching from --all to --next could be a valid change if the whole 
> proposal fix my concerns about discovery of step by step evolving.
>
Here's another possibility: what if evolve could detect when what is 
required is a simple rebase on top of an amended non-tip changeset 
(which I suspect it will be > 90% of the time), and if it is just do it 
using the existing rebase logic?

In any more complex situation it could bomb out with a message saying 
you either have to specify --all or --next, just like merge, rebase etc. 
do when it's not clear what they should do.

Colin



More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list