[PATCH 3 of 3] histedit: revive commits on demand

[Jun Wu]

Excerpts from Jun Wu's message of 2017-03-27 09:24:00 -0700:
> Excerpts from Pierre-Yves David's message of 2017-03-27 13:16:15 +0200:
> > 
> > On 03/27/2017 12:29 PM, Jun Wu wrote:
> > > Excerpts from Pierre-Yves David's message of 2017-03-27 09:17:59 +0200:
> > >>
> > >> On 03/26/2017 08:41 PM, Jun Wu wrote:
> > >>> # HG changeset patch
> > >>> # User Jun Wu <quark at fb.com>
> > >>> # Date 1490552007 25200
> > >>> #      Sun Mar 26 11:13:27 2017 -0700
> > >>> # Node ID b6766d75404fb8c5d26af016caa76f44b47ce156
> > >>> # Parent  336512ee2f947f07149e399a84927f9d820d2b62
> > >>> # Available At https://bitbucket.org/quark-zju/hg-draft  
> > >>> #              hg pull https://bitbucket.org/quark-zju/hg-draft    -r b6766d75404f
> > >>> histedit: revive commits on demand
> > >>>
> > >>> This is to address the "histedit --abort" issue mentioned in [1].
> > >>
> > >> There are still issues with that approach. For example in this
> > >> distributed case:
> > >>
> > >> 1) Alice send changesets to Bob,
> > >> 2) Bob try to histedit something in the stack, this fails
> > >> 3) Bob --abort the histedit
> > >> 4) Bob tell Alice to perform the operation herself since she know the
> > >> code better and can resolve the conflict
> > >> 5) Alice histedit with success
> > >
> > > Good example. But that's easily solvable by not writing the "parent"
> > > information when creating the markers, so the markers won't get exchanged.
> > 
> > This does not solve the issue, When Bob will pull from Alice, the issue 
> > will appears in Bob repository.
> > 
> > Please slow down.
> 
> Why? Bob won't get the marker from Alice.

It seems to be another example of what "node version" could solve.