Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Mon, 19 Nov 2018 01:44:28 +0000] rev 4257
compat: drop 4.3 compatiblity code for `ui.edit` method
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Mon, 19 Nov 2018 01:42:50 +0000] rev 4256
compat: drop 4.3 compatiblity code for 'successors' revset
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Mon, 19 Nov 2018 01:41:36 +0000] rev 4255
compat: drop 4.3 compatiblity code for 'precursors' revset
Matt Harbison <matt_harbison@yahoo.com> [Sat, 10 Nov 2018 23:54:46 -0500] rev 4254
compat: drop Mercurial 4.3 support for exthelper
The last release email noted plans to drop 4.3 and 4.4 support in the next
feature release. I'd like to move this code into core, and dropping this should
allow the class to be copied in unmodified.
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Mon, 19 Nov 2018 01:49:34 +0000] rev 4253
compat: update metadata about minimum ag version
Sushil khanchi <sushilkhanchi97@gmail.com> [Tue, 06 Nov 2018 10:41:50 +0530] rev 4252
next: solve the issue of `next` get confused by split
This patch solve a problem of next command which get confused by split.
Let me describe how it was getting confused:
Initial state of repo:
A---B---C
After splitting B to (B1,B2):
@
A---B1---B2
\
---B---C
X *
(note: C is orphan; checkedout to B1)
Lets make an amend on B1:
@
B1'
/
A---B1---B2
\ X *
\
---B---C
X *
Now, if run `hg next` (--evolve is True by default now):
$ it would give you choice to choose from B2 and C thinking that C could also
be a possbile children for B1, instead of stablizing B2 on B1.
I fixed this problem by filtering those aspiring children which can be
stablized on one of the aspiring children itself.
Changes made in test-prev-next.t shows the changed expected behaviour.
Sushil khanchi <sushilkhanchi97@gmail.com> [Tue, 06 Nov 2018 15:10:56 +0530] rev 4251
next: add test which shows that `next` get confused by split
Sushil khanchi <sushilkhanchi97@gmail.com> [Wed, 31 Oct 2018 14:08:56 +0530] rev 4250
cleanup: avoid a Yoda condition