Stefan Sperling wrote on Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 00:36:05 +0200: > On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 05:48:47PM -0400, Greg Stein wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 03:51, Stefan Sperling <s...@elego.de> wrote: > > > A first-class 'shelving' feature wouldn't have to worry about conflicts. > > > It would simply restore the working copy to the shelved state (either > > > destroying unrelated local modifications, or raising an error in case > > > of their presence). > > > > I think unshelving can create a full set of conflicts. As above, even > > a simple add/add conflict. > > > > If local mods exist, then we can simple disallow the unshelving. For > > now. With some additional work on conflict handling, we could do a > > full merge of the local mods and the shelved mods. > > Sure. But in the initial implementation we could just restore the former > working copy state, including mixed-revisioness etc. Just rewind everything > back to where it was and let a subsequent update sort out the conflicts. > That would already be a big improvement over the diff/patch approach.
If we do this, it would be nice if 'restore the former state' could be done offline --- e.g., by retaining the relevant pristines as long as the shelf exists. (Now, if the working copy is at state S and someone asks to return to a previously-shelved state, what do we do with S? Do we discard it, or do we first save it somewhere? And if we save it... do we save it as a new shelf?)
