Convenient metaedit
Friedrich Hagedorn
friedrich_h at gmx.de
Sat Apr 27 21:47:47 UTC 2019
On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 06:13:21PM +0530, Faheem Mitha wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Apr 2019, Friedrich Hagedorn wrote:
>
> > OK, maybe a compromise would be to combine only
> >
> > hg metaedit -r ...
> > hg evolve -aA
> >
> > into metaedit. In this way you can just use metaedit without to know the
> > (logical) concept behind the evolve mechanism. Do you think this would
> > be possible?
>
> I don't think one would get very far with Evolve by trying to automate away
> the `hg evolve` command. It's very central to the whole thing.
I totally agree with you for all the commands from the evolve-extension
except the metaedit.
[...]
> Also the evolve command isn't guaranteed to always work smoothly.
This is not true for metaedit because it's not modifying the changeset
itself. Therefor metaedit doesn't introduce any possible merge conflicts
and the final 'hg evolve -aA' command will never produce any problem.
For that reason it is really save to include the final evolve-step into
the metaedit command.
As a user I just want to edit the commit-message and not to do the
final stabilizing evolve which consumes to much concentration (at least
for me :-) The final evolve step must not done by the user because
there is no need for a further user interaction (no merge conflict to solve).
> In any case, I doubt that the evolve developers will want to bundle things
> together any more than they already have.
I know that the evolve-framework is much more powerfull then it has to
be for metaedit. But I hope my statements above can convince the
evolve-developers ;-)
> Though I think improved hinting would sometimes be helpful for the user, to
> tell him/her what he/she probably wants to do next. This isn't always clear.
Maybe
"Please run 'hg evolve --all --any' in order to finish metaedit."
instead of
"2 new orphan changesets"
would be at least a nice hint for the user.
Best regards
Friedrich
More information about the Evolve-testers
mailing list