[PATCH RFC] update: default update should move as far forward as possible (issue3883)

[Kevin Bullock]

On 11 Apr 2013, at 12:23 PM, Durham Goode wrote:

> If a user sees "abort: crosses branches" they're going to have to
> investigate anyway to learn why it failed.  That same investigation holds
> true with my change if hg update reports nothing changed. I think the new
> behavior is more globally useful and intuitive (for anonymous branch
> workflows, named branch flows, and bookmark flows).

Just to clarify, I think we're worried about (at least) two cases here:

--A--B*
   \
    D--E

and

--A--B*--C
   \
    D--E

where A, B, and C are local changes and D & E were pulled from upstream. AFAIU, your patch would report "nothing changed" in the former case, but update to C in the latter. (For those following along, we currently try to update to E in either case, and abort.)

Seeing "nothing changed" is a good hint, but only helps with the first case (and only helps partially anyway).

pacem in terris / мир / शान्ति / ‎‫سَلاَم‬ / 平和
Kevin R. Bullock