[PATCH] a small patch for mq

Chris Mason mason at suse.com
Tue Sep 13 06:44:55 CDT 2005

On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 18:01:36 -0400
Kevin Smith <yarcs at qualitycode.com> wrote:

> Bryan O'Sullivan wrote:
> > On Mon, 2005-09-12 at 22:48 +0200, Emanuele Aina wrote:
> > 
> >>The point is to always use _mq_ on a mq repo, and _hg_ on a hg one.
> > 
> > How is this supposed to be helpful?  I must be missing something;
> > the two repositories are the same.
> I understood the request right away, and still think it's a valid 
> proposal. It would allow someone to completely replace hq with mq. 
> Unless there were some extensions that conflicted with mq, I would
> have no reason to ever use the "plain" hq variant. I would just use
> mq on all my repos.
> I'm not convinced it's the best way to go, but from the standpoint of
> a user who just wants to use mq, it's very simple and friendly.

One of the things  I like about the extensions is that you can easily
mix and match them.  Right now I'm using both the hgit extension and
the mq extension on the same repository.  So, I'd rather try very hard
to keep them compatible with each other.  Hopefully there won't be many
command conflicts, but we can solve those problems when we get there.


More information about the Mercurial mailing list