hg branches --confuse: close, and list to be more intuitive

[rupert THURNER]

On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 22:59, Greg Ward<greg-hg at gerg.ca> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 6:25 AM, rupert.thurner<rupert.thurner at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 1. open and close a branch with the same command
>>   hg branch
>>   hg branch --close
>
> Unlikely.  http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/CompatibilityRules
> dictates that "commit --close" is here to stay, and it seems silly to
> have the same option/behaviour under two separate commands.
>
>> 2. help text for "hg branch" contains a hint
>>    that close is done via commit --close-branch as well
>
> Good idea.  Patches are always welcome!  See
> http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/ContributingChanges and
> http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/SuccessfulPatch.
>
>> 4. provide a "hg branch --rename"
>>
>> 5. provide a "hg branch --delete"
>>
>> what do you think?
>
> 4 and 5 are impossible[1] because of the way Mercurial implements
> branches.  The branch name is an immutable part of the changeset
> metadata.  Changing it would break everything.  And you cannot delete
> a branch without destroying everything that it depends on, so if your
> branch has been merged to any other branch... too bad.
>
> If you expect Mercurial branches to behave like git branches, you've
> got the wrong idea.  You might want to look at the 'bookmarks'
> extension.
>

will do.
once one figured out 1/2, the most paining point is anyway 3. (list of
active and closed branches). then also especially 5 is not paining as
well.

rupert.