I've looked at 359 and 360 so far.
> 360 recommit should check for workspace modification in the same
> manner as Mq would
Looks fine.
> 359 when recommit fails, cdm needs to make more effort to return the
> workspace to sanity.
[...]
> I'd like input on whether bringing the workspace
Mike Kupfer writes:
> I've looked at 359 and 360 so far.
>
>> 360 recommit should check for workspace modification in the same
>> manner as Mq would
>
> Looks fine.
>
>> 359 when recommit fails, cdm needs to make more effort to return the
>> workspace to sanity.
> [...]
>> I'd like inpu
> "Rich" == Richard Lowe writes:
Rich> More practically, we can return them to either where they were, or
Rich> the new tip (another option, which I didn't mention).
I like the option of returning at the new tip. If we require the user
to start at the local tip, and we always end at the new
http://bugs.grommit.com/show_bug.cgi?id=368
Summary: hg recommit with no actual changes confuses the mortals
Product: SCM Migration
Version: unspecified
Platform: All
OS/Version: Solaris 11/Nevada
Status: NEW
Severity: minor
http://bugs.grommit.com/show_bug.cgi?id=368
--- Comment #1 from richlowe at richlowe.net 2007-10-23 15:29 PDT ---
So, should we honour the reci despite the fact you did nothing?
(it shouldn't be problematic).
In other words, should I instead check whether you have outgoing changesets
http://bugs.grommit.com/show_bug.cgi?id=368
--- Comment #2 from levon at movementarian.org 2007-10-23 15:33 PDT ---
We should fail as we currently do, but perhaps say something like "no resultant
changes in outgoing changesets". I would not put too much time into being
helpful,
this c
