hg equivalent of git stash

anatoly techtonik techtonik at gmail.com
Mon Dec 12 22:09:23 UTC 2011


On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 10:25 PM, Brendan Cully <brendan at kublai.com> wrote:

> On Monday, 12 December 2011 at 09:46, Brendan Cully wrote:
> > This isn't a beautiful user experience, but it should work.
> >
> > This ugliness is the reason people have written the shelve and attic
> > extensions.
>
> By the way, I think another reason this is as ugly as it is, is that
> shelve/stash is probably mostly used by new converts from
> CVS/svn. Once you get into mq, it feels much better to keep your code
> always in an mq patch rather than leaving it unprotected in the
> working directory. So experienced users don't spend much time on the
> qref/qpop -f bits of the process.
>

I think you are wrong in both cases. Despite my vast experience with SVN,
CVS and cvs2svn, this post was inspired by git user, who showed me how do
they live without MQ. I am using queues for more than 6 months for sure,
but I am not as enthusiastic as you with them for several reasons: 1. I
still can not get enough time to learn them completely. 2. I can't
reorder/edit them without using editor to mess with .hg/patches. 3. Many
commands, but hard to do basic things - I still don't know if it is
possible to edit commit message with my editor after the patch is created,
or set it when finalizing MQ.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mercurial-scm.org/pipermail/mercurial/attachments/20111213/5a117f80/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the Mercurial mailing list