rdamazio added a comment.
In D7631#114393 <https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D7631#114393>, @mharbison72 wrote: > In D7631#112604 <https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D7631#112604>, @rdamazio wrote: > >> In D7631#112414 <https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D7631#112414>, @quark wrote: >> >>> `--rev` seems ambiguous since there might be different kinds of revisions to specify - target and revisions to edit. Maybe something like `--source`, `--from`, `--target`? >> >> Done. Used `--source` to match `rebase`. > > Is `--exact` from `hg fold` a better model? I don't feel strongly; I only mention it because `hg rebase -s` will take that revision and its descendants, so it's more like "stack" in my mind. I'm not sure how many other commands have `-s` off the top of my head, but @martinvonz > mentioned adding that to `hg fix` (probably in IRC), and I think mentioned the word "stack" in that context. So I might not be the only one to get slightly tripped up by that. IMHO no, needing `--exact` is actually confusing to almost every user we've talked to, and they'd instead expect that to be the default behavior, with "fold up to this commit" being the one that needs a specific flag. >> I'm assuming no fundamental objections then? Removing the "RFC" part so it gets a proper review then. > > I like it. Thanks INLINE COMMENTS > mharbison72 wrote in absorb.py:1141 > Should it abort if multiple revisions are given, instead of picking the > latest? I suspect other places may want something similar (e.g. it'd make sense in `rebase --dest`, so I changed revsingle to add the behavior. REPOSITORY rHG Mercurial CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D7631/new/ REVISION DETAIL https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D7631 To: rdamazio, #hg-reviewers Cc: mharbison72, martinvonz, pulkit, quark, mercurial-devel _______________________________________________ Mercurial-devel mailing list Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
