[don't merge too early, use graft when needed]

[Becker, Mischa J]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Uwe Brauer <oub at mat.ucm.es>
> Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2021 12:27 AM
> Subject: Re: [don't merge too early, use graft when needed]
>
> > Don't commit the bug fix to your secret branch, commit it to default
> > then merge it forward into your secret branch.
>
> >    a. Shelve the other changes leaving fix in working directory.
> >    b. Update to tip of default branch so fix can merge into default
> >       code.
> >       * In TortoiseHg I have to 1st update to most recent descendant
> >         from default branch before I can update to default's tip.
> >    c. Commit fix to default
> >    d. Merge committed change into secret branch.
>
> And then it stays secret? That seems to be a cleaner solution, since I
> find a merge easier to read in a graph than a graft (even with the --log
> option).  Don't you think the graft operation should be somehow better
> displayed in the graph (than via the --log option)?

Yes. Changes merged into a secret branch will also be secret while the public\draft parent branch will stay as is. It's only when merging from a secret branch out to a non-secret branch that a secret branch can't be secret anymore.

Oh, and you'll want to make sure your multiple local repos are not publishing so push\pulls between them don't change any of the revisions to public.
   [phases]
   publish = False

TortoiseHg displays graft parents with a dashed line without me needing to do anything. I find it's log much easier to read & with a lot more data than anything from command line hg. In the rare cases where I need to use the command line, I'll do so from TortoiseHg's console window. I'm an out-of-sight, out-of-mind person so certain concepts I found confusing, and mistakes that happened semi-frequently, back when I only used the command line, are obvious and almost never happen now that I'm using TortoiseHg where branch and working directory state are always visible front and center.  /*steps down off TortoisHg soapbox*

> I will try that out. It requires some ah discipline though (aehm).

You at least have several different points at which to catch it though. Sometimes it's not until I'm committing my changes that I realize "Wait, that's a bug fix that belongs in default". If I don't catch it until a while after committing to the wrong branch, then it's either graft or some history editing. (I'm not using evolve yet.)

> Thanks
>
> BTW: do you notice some problems with the mailing list? I do.
>
> Uwe

I don't write to the mailing list very frequently but when I do most of my email seems to get caught in moderation that someone has to approve. I've always blamed my company's Outlook security settings which add\mangle links but I don't really know what the trigger is. I did receive 3 separate copies of your graft (revert) email all at the same time that are weirdly different in size and attachments. Given the discrepancy between the Sent and Received timestamps I'd guess they were also caught in moderation. And if you didn't resend that email twice yourself then there was definitely something odd going on between your mail server and Mercurial's.

This email itself came thru very strangely as an attachment to another email which didn't have a body. If you originally sent it direct, I haven't received that copy.

Mischa

________________________________

This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is confidential and protected by law from unauthorized disclosure. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.