[PATCH evolve_ext V2] fold: take an explicit list of revisions (BC)

[Greg Ward]

On 23 June 2014, Pierre-Yves David said:
> On 06/22/2014 04:52 PM, Greg Ward wrote:
> ># HG changeset patch
> ># User Greg Ward <greg at gerg.ca>
> ># Date 1403481137 14400
> >#      Sun Jun 22 19:52:17 2014 -0400
> ># Node ID 4ab7a80fc11f275c03d4ddb94936a0688b71e6bc
> ># Parent  2fbba0bf7e7c8cbff1f94bc95c4d6214df85ef81
> >fold: take an explicit list of revisions (BC)
> 
> No thanks.

Darn. I guess I misunderstood our previous discussion about this.

> This use the be the default and ended up being very confusing. The
> vast majority of fold operation involve the working directory and an
> ancestors (something a descendant). The default should reflect that.
> Also, we should not requires user to have a PhD in revset to use Mercurial.

"REV::" is not a PhD-level revset.

> So, I'm deeply convince the default should be "fold between . and REV".

OK, fine. I happen to disagree, but whatever.

> How ever I agree than having different behavior for `hg fold REV`
> and `hg fold --rev REV` sucks.

OK, I'll see if I can fix that.

> I also agree that the "do an in
> memory fold of unrelated changeset" usecase is nice. We should think
> about a dedicated flag for this case.

--only? Example usage:

  hg fold --only R1 R2 ... Rn

combines R1, R2, and Rn to make a new changeset.

       Greg
-- 
Greg Ward                            http://www.gerg.ca
<greg at gerg.ca>                       @gergdotca