Mercurial wipes repository history!?

Sune Foldager cryo at cyanite.org
Thu Apr 8 14:30:06 CDT 2010


On 08-04-2010 17:08, Mark A. Flacy wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-04-08 at 15:54 +0100, Jon Ribbens wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 04:45:39PM +0200, Benoit Boissinot wrote:
>>> A transaction is an operation modifying the history. As far as I can
>>> tell from your command log, the last transaction *is* the clone
>>> operation.
>>
>> It is in that log, yes. It was not in the scenario we were trying to
>> replicate. It is also not at all clear to me that "clone" should be
>> a roll-backable operation (it is evidently not clear to the hg authors
>> either, since a local clone is not roll-backable and a remote clone
>> is.)
> 
> 
> "clone" is a transaction.  The fact that a local clone cannot be rolled
> back is an error.

The reason for that being that local clones just hard-links to the
source, so there are no transactions involved. I'd say it's not a bug.

At any rate, all this is pretty moot... I've never heard anyone complain
about a REAL scenario where they used rollback on a fresh clone. As the
OP said, he's claiming some other bug, which he has yet to reproduce, so
we should really all just stop discussing this further :)

/Sune


More information about the Mercurial mailing list