[PATCH 1 of 2] histedit: add stop verb

[Augie Fackler]

On Sep 9, 2014, at 12:54 PM, David Soria Parra <davidsp at fb.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> Am 9/9/14, 9:35 AM, schrieb Augie Fackler:
>> 
>> On Sep 9, 2014, at 12:34 PM, David Soria Parra <davidsp at fb.com
>> <mailto:davidsp at fb.com>> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Am 9/9/14, 8:57 AM, schrieb Augie Fackler:
>>>> On Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 09:35:54AM -0700, David Soria Parra wrote:
>>>>> # HG changeset patch
>>>>> # User David Soria Parra <davidsp at fb.com <mailto:davidsp at fb.com>>
>>>>> # Date 1409941197 -7200
>>>>> #      Fri Sep 05 20:19:57 2014 +0200
>>>>> # Node ID e79544cdfb81f88d782e923d96e8ad63303aec94
>>>>> # Parent  c4b1d0db14c257e9fbb58e0f044c28f12dade3dd
>>>>> histedit: add stop verb
>>>>> 
>>>>> We are adding a 'stop' verb for histedit. This applies the changes
>>>>> and drops the user into a shell after committing the changes. This
>>>>> allows to
>>>>> amend or modify the commit with external tooling. However, as a
>>>>> changeset can
>>>>> have potential children which would dissallow amending, we have to
>>>>> recreate the
>>>>> commit and therefore all hashes after a first stop are changing.
>>>> 
>>>> What happens if I do 'stop' but don't make changes? Does the user get
>>>> to retain the original, non-fussed-with hash?
>>>> 
>>>> (I'm not 100% sure it's a showstopper if the answer is "no", but I'd
>>>> really like the answer to be "yes".)
>>> 
>>> The answer here is "no". When we are recreating the node, we are getting
>>> a new hash. We would need to be able to compare afterwards if the new
>>> node and the original node "match", consdering they have different
>>> hashes. As far as I can tell we don't have any way to do that at the
>>> moment, so I opted that we always recreate the node if you use stop and
>>> have obsolence markers disabled.
>> 
>> Could you compare the manifest node? Would that always be the same?
> 
> Yes. But this assumes that the user didn't change just the commit
> message or author.


Hm.

Could we just only offer 'stop' if the user has obsolete enabled? Would that be sufficient for Facebook today, and not put weird edge cases into the behavior of histedit?

(I'm not sure I want to do that either, I'm just mulling over which of the handful of terrible options is the least awful.)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial-devel/attachments/20140909/656f5bb0/attachment.pgp>