hg remove implicit for whole tree commits?
robin.farine at terminus.org
Sat Aug 6 19:55:14 CDT 2005
On Sunday 07 August 2005 01.15, Matt Mackall wrote:
> That behavior seems to have snuck in quietly. We probably don't
> want to be automatically deleting files without the -A flag.
Do you mean that a commit should fail in presence of deleted but not
hg removed files? Or should the commit succeed but not register the
files as removed in the repository? The former looks like the
safest to me, given that hg status displays 'R' in both cases.
Perhaps hg status could display a 'D' for deleted but not removed
Also, In the case of new but not hg added files, a whole tree commit
currently (0.6b) succeeds but ignores these files. But since hg
status displays a '?' for new but not added files, at least we are
Chris Mason recently added a '--force' option to commit to allow
commits without actual changes in the working directory. This new
option could be used so that:
- commit without -A or --force fails in presence of files
'hg status' flags with 'D' (as per above) or '?'
- commit -A fails when there are no changes on the working
directory but otherwise handles 'D' or '?' files appropriately
- commit --force accepts empty changesets and succeeds in presence
of 'D' or '?' files but ignores them
- commit -A --force accepts empty changesets and takes care of
'D' or '?' files
What do you think?
I am asking all these questions because I am currently trying to
write the source part of a tailor backend for tla to track tla-
maintained projects with Mercurial, tla and Mercurial sharing the
same working directory for each project. And it proved not as
trivial as I first thought.
Thanks for your patience,
More information about the Mercurial