durin42 added a comment.
In https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D2679#68489, @lothiraldan wrote: > To take a step back, I'm wondering what's the end goal? I remember there was a discussion about having rebase enabled by default, is it related? Getting rebase (and maybe histedit?) enabled by default is my recollection of the rough goal. > The behavior target by this series ("unobsolete" re-pulled changeset) conflicts with the final behavior we want for Changeset Evolution. Intermediate steps are a good way to make progress. I feel like it is important to write down a clear plan when it comes to adding behavior that does not match our final goals. How are we planning to transition from the local-only step to full (ie, distributed) Evolution? I'm slowly becoming convinced that the long-unquestioned axiom that "all markers are distributed globally" isn't correct, and this is part of why: it's potentially of great value to be able to restore a change by re-pulling it, even though the obsmarkers would normally cause it to be deleted. It's _super confusing_ when I `hg import` a patch and it seems to work but also immediately disappears, so I've got more sympathy for this PoC series than I do the theoretical purity of markers having any kind of globalness. Does that make sense? REPOSITORY rHG Mercurial REVISION DETAIL https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D2679 To: indygreg, #hg-reviewers Cc: durin42, lothiraldan, pulkit, mercurial-devel _______________________________________________ Mercurial-devel mailing list Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
