Re: RFR [9] sequential operation option for hgforest

2014-04-10 Thread Chris Hegarty
On 10 Apr 2014, at 20:03, Mike Duigou wrote: > Looks good to me and useful. (Other than that I had hoped to claim "-s" for > a future change I planned ;-) (no worries, I will use "-r" for that)) Thanks for the review Mike. If you want to keep ‘-s’ we can come up with something else, “—np|—no

Re: RFR [9] sequential operation option for hgforest

2014-04-10 Thread Mike Duigou
Looks good to me and useful. (Other than that I had hoped to claim "-s" for a future change I planned ;-) (no worries, I will use "-r" for that)) Mike On Apr 10 2014, at 08:54 , Chris Hegarty wrote: > Sometimes I get a little confused/nervous when trying to push/status/in using > the hgfores

RFR [9] sequential operation option for hgforest

2014-04-10 Thread Chris Hegarty
Sometimes I get a little confused/nervous when trying to push/status/in using the hgforest.sh script. The output can be a little confusing as it runs several jobs in parallel. I would like to add an option to support sequential operation of commands. It is off by default. The more nervous of us