- User Since
- Jun 29 2017, 2:56 PM (139 w, 7 h)
It seems like I faild to have a look soon™
Tue, Feb 25
I just mean to use changelog=changelog in the super call... but this actually looks more robust.
Thanks for adding the test.
Mon, Feb 24
Since run-test has no idea where to put (?) line with the surounding change, they often end up preserved at start/end of the changeset section. This is probably just something like that.
Could we get a test for this? To make sure the hint looks fine and that the error code does not crash ?
Since the line does not occurs on linux, this probably got affected by some other change without being noticed.
You need to add (issue6276) in your changeset summary so that the ticket get closed when you land this.
I am also +1 for this change. divergence bookmark are close to "remote" bookmark and should not be exchanged. Especially because it open the way to divergent-divergent-bookmark and other hells.
This looks good to me.
The usecase looks correct, the test change seems correct and the test is good. I can't think of any issue here.
Fri, Feb 21
I would be nice to have test but I assume this is hard. The description seems clear so I trusting Kyle on this one.
Looks good. Thansk for the fix. I assume this should go on stable?
This patch seem (embarrassedly) right.
Mon, Feb 17
I've a couple of high level question:
Sat, Feb 15
Fri, Feb 14
Simple clear effective. Thanks for splitting
looks good to me. thanks for plitting
As per comment of Pulkit and I on D7730, please spin this test toward forbiding the prune while the rebase is in progress.
There don't seems to be any remaininf feedback on this.
Thu, Feb 13
As explained in this comment https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D8030#120771 I find the idea of usign a changeset in place of the working copy interresting. However, this is a larger big UX change that seems to deserve a wider discussion with more of the community involved. In particular I am not convinced about the --rev flag usage.
The UI seems good, but it seems like we should have --dry-run supports and I find the help text confusing (I made improvement suggestion).
This is supposed to be a graft of something already accepted on default. So unless I did a mistake on the graft (cc @Alphare for checking) any feedback on this also apply on the default one.
Wed, Feb 12
phabricator seems to be very confused about the performance number formatting…
INTENDED FOR STABLE
INTENDED FOR STABLE
Tue, Feb 11
It looks like this series is introducing UI change of the same kind as the one @martinvonz is looking into for hg copy. I'll try to have a look at both of them tomorrow.