quark added a comment.
In https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D817#15385, @mbthomas wrote: > I'm thinking now that maybe we don't want `move` at all. If someone does want to move a commit using histedit, they can `copy` it in and then strip/hide the old commit. At the moment there is no way for histedit to affect commits outside the history range that it is editing, and I think that's a good thing. With the current design, copy X to Y then prune (which could be different from "hide", I think our "hide" implementation is still subject to change) X will not create an obsmarker from X to Y. That is the reason why move is needed. That's also mentioned in IRC: Sep 25 11:14:00 <durin42> I think they probably both need to exist Sep 25 11:14:05 <durin42> since move should record an obsolete marker It might be possible to make things smarter so copy X to Y then hide X is equivalent to move X to Y. But the existing code does not support that yet. REPOSITORY rHG Mercurial REVISION DETAIL https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D817 To: mbthomas, #hg-reviewers, ryanmce Cc: quark, ryanmce, mercurial-devel _______________________________________________ Mercurial-devel mailing list Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
