[Commented On] D7177: rebase: introduce optional parent mapping

[marmoute (Pierre-Yves David)]

marmoute added a comment.


  In D7177#128756 <https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D7177#128756>, @martinvonz wrote:
  
  > In D7177#128740 <https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D7177#128740>, @marmoute wrote:
  >
  >> In D7177#128389 <https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D7177#128389>, @martinvonz wrote:
  >>
  >>> Maybe another option is to allow multiple `-d` arguments for this case? Something like `hg rebase -r C -d B -d D`. I haven't thought through BC, but I think that's what I'd prefer if we were writing rebase from scratch. I know we can't support `hg rebase -r C -d 'B + D'` for backward-compatibility reasons (because we already support that -- it rebases to the highest revnum in the set).
  >>
  >> That's interresting. How would that works with a practical case ?
  >
  > The example I have was meant to be a practical example for how to do it in the case given in the patch description :) But let me know if you meant some other aspect of "how it works". As I said, I'm not sure ant the BC bit of it at least.
  
  I meant how that would work in general, esepcially case more complicated than the basic base shown by @joerg.sonnenberger.
  
  Not that in @joerg base, B being ancestors of both C and C', we could probably behave better by default directly. Could we not ?

REPOSITORY
  rHG Mercurial

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D7177/new/

REVISION DETAIL
  https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D7177

To: joerg.sonnenberger, martinvonz, #hg-reviewers, baymax
Cc: mercurial-patches, marmoute, mercurial-devel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mercurial-scm.org/pipermail/mercurial-patches/attachments/20200609/1d2c8697/attachment-0002.html>