On Wed, 20 Nov 2019 12:38:50 -0500, Pierre-Yves David
<[email protected]> wrote:
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
?
direct-predecessor and direct-successor seem more clear and explicit than
evolution-*.
And going one step further, it might make sense that these are looking for
the direct successor/predecessor in global state (and could therefore be
empty if something was edited in another clone), and change the existing
predecessor/successor to find the closest one that is currently in the
repo. Similar to what I was wondering about on IRC the other day.
_______________________________________________
Evolve-testers mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/evolve-testers
