Message109255
> [...] using a simple "hg status" of the working copy will not do the right thing
I think all of these workflows share a step where you have edits in your working directory that are not in the working dir’s parent changeset. Thus, I argue that hg status is helpful in a majority of cases.
In the long term, it may be better to make patchcheck work on diffs rather than $vcs status (that will be an interesting challenge for me), or something else depending on the future dev policy. That is explicitly what I’m not doing here: I’m doing a straightforward patch to add support for Mercurial in a way that just mimics Subversion, doesn’t mandate one workflow, and doesn’t cost anything.
Now it’s up to you to commit this or set resolution to “later”, I won’t argue further or complain. :) |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2010-07-04 19:00:49 | eric.araujo | set | recipients:
+ eric.araujo, brett.cannon, mark.dickinson, belopolsky, pitrou |
2010-07-04 19:00:49 | eric.araujo | set | messageid: <1278270049.54.0.0963299210107.issue8999@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2010-07-04 19:00:47 | eric.araujo | link | issue8999 messages |
2010-07-04 19:00:47 | eric.araujo | create | |
|