obsolete marker terminology

Pierre-Yves David pierre-yves.david at ens-lyon.org
Wed Nov 20 17:38:50 UTC 2019


These terms are already used by the normal graph. So we cannot really 
reuse them directly.

Are you suggesting we use:

- successors-parents,
- successors-descendants,
- predecessors-parents,
- predecessors-ancestors ?


On that topic, we started to talk about `evolution` to refer to the 
various iteration over a changesets. So maybe:

- successor,
- evolution-child,
- evolution-parent,
- predecessor

?

On 11/19/19 9:39 AM, Paul Jackson wrote:
> On the page:
> 
> https://www.mercurial-scm.org/doc/evolution/obs-terms.html
> 
> the author notes:
> 
>> I’m not very happy with this naming scheme and I’m looking for a 
>> better distinction between direct successors and any successors.
> 
> How about: ancestor and descendant, and (for the direct case) parent and 
> child.
> 
> This is in line with the directed graph terminology at:
> 
> http://www-math.ucdenver.edu/~wcherowi/courses/m4408/glossary.html
> 
> (If there was a better place for me to suggest this, I welcome the 
> advice - thanks!)
> 
> -- 
>                  Paul Jackson
>                  pj at usa.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Evolve-testers mailing list
> Evolve-testers at mercurial-scm.org
> https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/evolve-testers
> 

-- 
Pierre-Yves David



More information about the Evolve-testers mailing list