Short revision numbers - are they shared now?

[Steve Barnes]

On 23/02/14 08:57, anatoly techtonik wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Martin Geisler <martin at geisler.net> wrote:
>> anatoly techtonik <techtonik at gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> I've just noticed that short revision numbers are not
>>> consecutive for my repository. Are they shared now?
>>> Meaning that I can reference short revisions in they
>>> are gone public?
>> No, quite the opposite: when you begin using the evolve extension, your
>> local Mercurial will hide (instead of strip) changesets you're amended
>> and rebased. The hidden changesets still take up a revision number and
>> this is what causes the gaps in the numbers.
>>
>> When you push your changes to another repository, it is only the final
>> version that you push. So if you see commits with revision numbers
>>
>>    10 other stuff
>>    11 more stuff
>>    15 my new feature
>>
>> in your local repo, then they will end up with revision number like in
>> the central repository (assuming (among other things) that noone else
>> pushed anything):
>>
>>    10 other stuff
>>    11 more stuff
>>    12 my new feature
>>
>> That is, the number change since you're not pushing your own hidden
>> revisions (12-14). Revisions 12-14 could be old amended versions of what
> Yes. That was the cause. "hg log --hidden" revealed all these. The only
> problem was to discover this command, because "hg log --hidden" itself
> is hidden from the output of "hg log -h".
But not from the `hg log -v -h` or `hg -v help log` commands.