James Carlson writes: > Danek Duvall writes: > > A compromise could be something like this: > > > > -r r1 changes from p(r1) to r1 > > -r r1: changes from p(r1) to WD > > -r r1:r2 changes from p(r1) to r2 > > I don't see that as a compromise, because, unlike the second case, it > still has the expensive (and possibly un-do-able) p() function in it.
Someone pointed out privately that p() here means parent _changeset_, and not parent _repository_. Sorry for misunderstanding. The lack of an 'active' file is one of the underlying issues that's problematic with hg on a day-to-day usage basis. I really don't like futzing with ssh bits and waiting eons to get hg active data. That (rather big) issue aside, I agree with Bill that it ought to be analogous to 'diff', because a webrev _is_ just a formalized 'diff' presented for review. It's not an extraction. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <james.d.carl...@sun.com> Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 _______________________________________________ tools-discuss mailing list tools-discuss@opensolaris.org
