Ben Fritz wrote: > Does "rebase" integrate with MQ to set up the queue base changeset and > such properly? I really, really don't like the idea of messing around > with MQ changesets in this way, unless I know it works.
Yes, it resets all the MQ-specific tags to what they would have been had you qpushed onto the new changeset. > I saw recently on the Mercurial mailing list that MQ is planned for > deprecation (still supported, but not recommended for new users). One of > the suggested replacements was "changeset evolution" combined with > rebase, histedit, and strip if needed. The idea was to use normal > changesets with the "secret" phase on so you could use all the internal > Mercurial machinery better. But I don't know how mature this approach > is, and I'm having a little trouble wrapping my mind around it without > trying it out first. I already know how to work with MQ, on the other > hand. I'm in the same boat. I've been using MQ for years and am comfortable with it, and haven't had the time to try out obsolescence in any serious way, though I'm actually quite excited about it, since I'd love to have the history of my patch changes for the duration of the patch. I tried out pbranch several years ago, but it was just too wild, and the merges were horrendous. Danek -- -- You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
