Some thoughts about Mercurial bookmarks

[Bryan Murdock]

On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 9:16 AM, David Demelier
<demelier.david at gmail.com> wrote:
> 3. Rebase extension does not move bookmarks
>
> When using Git, creating a branch is like creating a bookmark, it does not
> create new heads. Thus, when you're done with your work, you can just do git
> rebase and all of the code is merged.
>
> By contrast, Mercurial will only allow rebasing if the bookmark revision is
> actually in a different head, that means you have to check manually the tree
> for what action you must do, either rebasing or moving yourself the bookmark
> where you want.
>
> I suggest that hg rebase could simply move the bookmark from the source to
> the destination if they are in the same head and to a real rebase instead.
>
> Of course, an other "uniform" rebase command would also be welcome.

I personally found this to be the most confusing thing when first
learning git, calling an operation that simply moves a "branch"
(pointer to a commit) a merge or a rebase.  I would vote that if a
merge or rebase command results in simply moving a bookmark and not
actually changing/creating commits then the merge/rebase command very
clearly makes that known.

Bryan