martinvonz added a comment.
In D7630#118997 <https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D7630#118997>, @rdamazio wrote: >> In D7630#117270 <https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D7630#117270>, @marmoute wrote: >> >>> In D7630#115320 <https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D7630#115320>, @pulkit wrote: >>> >>>>>> This results in an empty commit which is not similar to what rebase or evolve will generally result in after `D7631` unless `ui.allowemptycommit=True` is set. I think good behavior is to obsolete the absorbed changeset in favour of either it's parent or one of the revs in which it was absorbed. >>>>> >>>>> I made a related comment on the parent patch before I realized that this patch adds obsmarker handling. My suggestion there was to mark all the commits that got absorbed into as successors, and if there's anything left in the absorbed commit, that would be yet another successor. Would that work? >>>> >>>> Yep, that sounds good. >> >> I'm fine with doing this, but is there an efficient way to detect that it became empty? > > And by "this" I meant I'm fine with making it disappear if allowemptycommit is False. I don't fully understand how markers help accomplish that. When you try to create an empty commit, you'll get a `None` back for the nodeid (from `repo.commitctx()`, IIRC), so check for that. REPOSITORY rHG Mercurial CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D7630/new/ REVISION DETAIL https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D7630 To: rdamazio, #hg-reviewers Cc: marmoute, pulkit, martinvonz, mercurial-devel _______________________________________________ Mercurial-devel mailing list Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
