hg rebase killed branch name?

Pierre-Yves David pierre-yves.david at ens-lyon.org
Sun Jan 18 16:17:38 CST 2015

On 01/18/2015 02:16 AM, anatoly techtonik wrote:
> 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.

I think this data belong to the wiki.

Pierre-Yves David

More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list