[PATCH 4 of 4 V2] obsolete: allow cycles

Jun Wu quark at fb.com
Thu Mar 30 12:55:00 EDT 2017

Excerpts from Augie Fackler's message of 2017-03-30 12:43:31 -0400:
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Jun Wu <quark at fb.com> wrote:
> > I'll drop it from patchwork and send a new version with better documentation
> > and some planned fixes. The next version has a same core idea, but the
> > interface is more formalized and is made future proof in mind. The interface
> > changes are by myself and haven't been discussed here.
> Actually, based on a quick discussion I had with Durham, can you check
> with him before sending another volley? It'll help the reviewers if we
> can keep the patch traffic on this topic at a lower rate until we
> actually get some better understanding of where we want/need to go
> architecturally.
> Thanks!

I'll chat with him today. Thanks!

By the way, for series about histedit - I agree that marmoute was right, and
rolling back is the right choice for now. So everything about histedit
should be considered as "settled for now". A better solution about histedit
*depends on* the "node versions" approach. So I may restart the histedit
change if we have "node versions".

The most interesting discussion to me is so-called "obscycles" (aka this
series), but it's more precisely "node versions" as the first patch title
suggests. "cycles" are just a subset of problems it solves <- this paragraph
is for marmoute who might think I don't even understand my own patches.

More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list