hg rebase killed branch name?
anatoly techtonik
techtonik at gmail.com
Sun Jan 18 04:16:29 CST 2015
On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 11:08 PM, Matt Mackall <mpm at selenic.com> wrote:
>
> That's basically everything. Being compatible with yesterday is WAY more
> important than being perfect. Especially in a tool like an SCM which is
> primarily about handling work over long time scales, it's literally _the
> most important feature_.
>
> If you're asking for a list of design regrets, sure, I have some. But
> there's a hierarchy that goes something like this:
>
> 1. Design choices I regret
> 2. Design choices I don't regret but most people still complain about
> 3. Design choices I don't regret but some people still complain about
> 4. Design choices I don't regret and only techtonik complains about
>
> ..and this one is squarely in class 4, the least interesting to
> document.
That would be a very good thing to have, and no problem with class 4 -
I can fork and document least interesting stuff myself if the rest of
the info is already available somewhere in repository.
--
anatoly t.
More information about the Mercurial-devel
mailing list