D2396: stack: import Evolve stack test file

[martinvonz (Martin von Zweigbergk)]

martinvonz added inline comments.

INLINE COMMENTS

> test-stack.t:81
> +  |
> +  o  3 foo draft c_d
> +  |

What if this was @ in the hg repo and only commits 4 and 5 were my own, then I would not want it to be part of my stack. It feels like a definition of upstream would be very helpful. Perhaps a way of providing a separate upstream per commit would be useful. Let's say upstream() was a revset, then I feel like something like "only(., upstream(.))" would be my stack. Of course, it gets weird if I have a history like we have here and I have defined the upstream of 4 to be 2 and the upstream of 5 to be 3 (or the other way around). I guess only commits that share an upstream can be part of the same stack.

> test-stack.t:96-108
> +  @  6 foo draft c_d
> +  |
> +  | *  5 foo draft c_f
> +  | |
> +  | *  4 foo draft c_e
> +  | |
> +  | x  3 foo draft c_d

I think I would have preferred to see all of these in my stack rather than just commit 6. Would you?

REPOSITORY
  rHG Mercurial

REVISION DETAIL
  https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D2396

To: lothiraldan, #hg-reviewers, indygreg
Cc: martinvonz, yuja, indygreg, mercurial-devel