These terms are already used by the normal graph. So we cannot really
reuse them directly.
Are you suggesting we use:
- successors-parents,
- successors-descendants,
- predecessors-parents,
- predecessors-ancestors ?
On that topic, we started to talk about `evolution` to refer to the
various iteration over a changesets. So maybe:
- successor,
- evolution-child,
- evolution-parent,
- predecessor
?
On 11/19/19 9:39 AM, Paul Jackson wrote:
On the page:
https://www.mercurial-scm.org/doc/evolution/obs-terms.html
the author notes:
I’m not very happy with this naming scheme and I’m looking for a
better distinction between direct successors and any successors.
How about: ancestor and descendant, and (for the direct case) parent and
child.
This is in line with the directed graph terminology at:
http://www-math.ucdenver.edu/~wcherowi/courses/m4408/glossary.html
(If there was a better place for me to suggest this, I welcome the
advice - thanks!)
--
Paul Jackson
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
Evolve-testers mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/evolve-testers
--
Pierre-Yves David
_______________________________________________
Evolve-testers mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/evolve-testers
