Some thoughts about Mercurial bookmarks

[Ryan McElroy]

On 5/12/2015 11:04 AM, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote:
> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Jensen, Aaron <ajensen at webmd.net 
> <mailto:ajensen at webmd.net>> wrote:
>
>     > 2. Calling hg update moves the bookmark automatically
>     >
>     > This issue bugs me because I didn't expect that hg update would
>     move a
>     > bookmark.
>
>     +1
>
>     I couldn't agree more. This is the only reason we don't recommend
>     widespread use of bookmarks. I'm quite flabbergasted at this
>     design choice.
>
>
> In fact, I just (30 seconds ago) got bitten by this myself. I have a 
> bookmark for an old release. I updated to that bookmark, issued a new 
> release, ran "hg update -C" to get back to the tip of the repo – and 
> the bookmark came with me. This is not just baffling, it's plain wrong.
>
>
I agree and have plans to fix this, but it is a big 
backwards-compatibility breaking change that the community will need to 
noodle over for a bit most likely. I have a series of changes out to 
standardize and clean up the internal and external naming of the 
bookmarks API, and that should allow us to more cleanly make a breaking 
change like this.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mercurial-scm.org/pipermail/mercurial/attachments/20150512/b37cc37d/attachment-0002.html>