On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 04:59:10PM -0600, Mark J. Nelson wrote: > >You're advocating dropping .hgtags on the floor (which I actually used > >to do, and I decided that was wrong), and stripping everything > >unreachable out of localtags. That is more far-reaching in effect > >than what I'd been intending to cover, and you don't really justify > >that in this mail (I can imagine justification for removing any tag > >that's dangling in general, but not necessarily the rest). > > Dean, you actually hit this case in practice, right? Was that contrived, > or the result of a normal workflow?
Well, not contrived--I had no intention of ending up in that situation. I bumbled my way into this one while testing the gate-side hooks. So yes, I'll say I hit it in a normal workflow. It just seemed at that point where recommit completes, I was stuck; recommit does not let me fix that cset, and my gate-side hooks would not allow me to push it with the tag (yes, the tag hook works). I would have to export, edit, strip, import; or one of the other just-as-ugly methods. How many people are comfortable using, or even explaining, the 'revert' method for this kind of repair, eh? (Ah, quilt fold...a fine, flexible, simple, recommit workflow, with no expectations of hand-holding.) I satisfied with Rich's argument of doing as little meddling as possible. Let that code go in. Someone's going to come back later and ask for an option on recommit to drop .hgtags. Dean
