Mercurial wipes repository history!?

[Mark A. Flacy]

On Thu, 2010-04-08 at 21:30 +0200, Sune Foldager wrote:

> 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.


That requires the user to understand the internals of the tool to
understand why there is different behavior.  Not a good thing, IMO, but
your mileage may vary.


-- 
Mark A. Flacy <mflacy at verizon.net>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial/attachments/20100408/50964151/attachment.htm>