2011/5/9 R. David Murray <rdmurray at bitdance.com>: > On Mon, 09 May 2011 09:08:53 -0500, Benjamin Peterson <benjamin at python.org> wrote: >> I thought the whole point of merging was that you brought a changeset >> from one branch to another. This why I just write "merge" because >> otherwise you're technically duplicating information that is pulled >> onto the branch by merging. > > No it isn't. The commit message isn't pulled into the new branch. > >> It seems like something that should be solved by tools like a display >> visual graph indicating what is merged. (like Bazaar) > > You'd need some extension to hg log that would show the original commit > message for the first changeset in the merge line in order to "fix" > this. I doubt that is going to happen. *cough* http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/GraphlogExtension > > Note that saying just 'merge' makes perfect sense when you are pulling > in a whole group of changesets in order to synchronize two branches. > But if you are applying a single changeset to multiple branches, > as we often do in our workflow, then I think duplicating the commit > message is (1) easy to do and (2) very helpful when looking at > hg log output. What's the difference between pulling multiple changesets in and one then? -- Regards, Benjamin
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4