On 15/1/19 16:40, Marcus Harnisch wrote: > 2. In some cases I know exactly which revision should be amended with my > changes, while the algorithm might believe differently. Interactive mode > helps but could be rather inconvenient in simple cases which at the same > time might affect many files (confirmation needed for each file). Would > it make sense to be able to specify a revision explicitly?
Oh, please, yes. Add a "-r" parameter or similar, please. In my personal situation, many times "absorb" is unable to identify the revision and it does nothing at all. Being able to explicitly indicate the revision would be a godseed. In those situations I must revert to old learned techniques like importing in "mq" and doing the collapse there. PS: I am using mercurial 4.8.2. -- Jesús Cea Avión _/_/ _/_/_/ _/_/_/ [email protected] - http://www.jcea.es/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ Twitter: @jcea _/_/ _/_/ _/_/_/_/_/ jabber / xmpp:[email protected] _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ "Things are not so easy" _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ "My name is Dump, Core Dump" _/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/_/ _/_/ "El amor es poner tu felicidad en la felicidad de otro" - Leibniz
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Mercurial mailing list [email protected] https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial
