[PATCH RFC] reflog: adds a reflog extension

[David Soria Parra]

Durham Goode <durham at fb.com> writes:

> On 10/2/14, 10:59 AM, Matt Mackall wrote:
>> On Thu, 2014-10-02 at 13:43 -0400, Augie Fackler wrote:
>>> On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 06:45:45PM -0700, Durham Goode wrote:
>>>> # HG changeset patch
>>>> # User Durham Goode <durham at fb.com>
>>>> # Date 1412200597 25200
>>>> #      Wed Oct 01 14:56:37 2014 -0700
>>>> # Node ID 942be96848993cf7ab5ed529db9c1f39c6d43c30
>>>> # Parent  939ce500c92a3dcc0e10815242361ff70a6fcae9
>>>> reflog: adds a reflog extension
>>> Perhaps this could live at 'bookmark --log'? Given that we don't have
>>> anything called a ref, the name reflog is kind of a bummer.
>>>
>>> Other options:
>>> bmlog
>>> booklog
>>>
>>> (I'm bad at naming things. I think I like bookmark --log the best?)
>> That is considerably less horrible.
>>
> The only problem is that it also tracks the working copy parent (and
> potentially branch heads) as well.  How would they fit in to bookmark
> --log?
>
> dsop had an interesting idea a while back.  He said it'd be nice if
> there was a command that could restore your repo to the state it was
> in at a previous point in time (heads, bookmarks, working copy parent,
> etc).  Almost like a timemachine.  'hg timemachine', or something
> involving the word 'time', might be more descriptive of the actual
> usecase that reflog is used for (i.e. going back in time) and not
> limit us to a bookmark specific command.

Unless we have that restore functionality, I think timemachine might not
suitable. I would go for something like hg statelog.