[PATCH 3 of 3 V2] summary: add evolution "troubles" information to parents header lines

Denis Laxalde denis.laxalde at logilab.fr
Mon Dec 19 03:28:47 EST 2016


Pierre-Yves David a écrit :
> On 11/08/2016 03:19 PM, Denis Laxalde wrote:
>> # HG changeset patch
>> # User Denis Laxalde <denis.laxalde at logilab.fr>
>> # Date 1475935828 -7200
>> #      Sat Oct 08 16:10:28 2016 +0200
>> # Node ID 35c0f05d694cb9541d60bad9a940cb93a39d615d
>> # Parent  b5d3d230bbc64d44968a9912e8e72aac8236522a
>> # EXP-Topic evolve-ui
>> summary: add evolution "troubles" information to parents header lines
>>
>> Extend labels of the `parent: ` line according to what `hg log`
>> displays when
>> coming from changeset_printer. This would make this line appear the
>> same in
>> log and summary with custom colors in particular.
>>
>> Extend that line with "troubles" information in parentheses, when the
>> parent
>> is troubled.
>
> I know there have been objection against that, but I cannot remember
> which one and why. Can you dig the mailing list a bit to see if you find
> something?

I can remember that nobody was in favor of the "trouble" term despite
it's already used here and there (though not part of any API).

 From a non-technical perspective, this term arguably feels unsuitable.
But on the other hand, it reminds me the term "troubleshooting" and its
usage in a technical context; so in this respect, it feels quite
appropriate.

(The funny thing is that this word "trouble" comes from the Old French:
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/trouble)

Unless I missed something, the only alternative proposal, from Kevin,
was "evolution:". Quoting his message:

Kevin Bullock:
> I'm also not keen on 'troubles'. For this purpose, I'd suggest
> 'evolution:' by analogy to 'bisect:'. That won't work for referring
> to the combined set of {divergences, bumps, ...}, but for labelling
> "this changeset's evolution status" I think it works.

I'm fine with this proposal. So if it's ok for you, I can send back the
series with this term and other changes you suggested. Just let me know.

> Regarding the form, I would probably drop the "troubles:" part. eg:
>
>  parent: 15:73568ab6879d tip (unstable)
>
> Maybe we could use something else that (), but that seems fine so lets
> stay with this.

Good idea.


More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list