Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso <jordigh@octave.org> [Mon, 30 Jun 2014 13:29:49 -0400] rev 996
fold: overhaul handling of revisions with --rev (BC)
The fold command parsed the revision arguments in a very peculiar and
idiosyncratic fashion: if revisions were passed without a --rev
argument, then they would all be extended to ".", but if they were
passed with --rev, then no extension would happen. Passing revisions
both with and without --rev would abort. This is inconsistent with the
way all other hg commands parse revision arguments. We have several
examples of command where several revisions are passed, and the --rev
option is optional for specifying those revisions (update, strip,
export).
This patch alters the way in which fold parses its revision arguments.
No distinction is made between revisions passed with or without the
--rev argument. Regardless if a single or multiple revision is
specified, all will be folded together into the parent of the working
directory. If the --exact argument is passed, then the parent of the
working directory is ignored and the specified revisions must be a
single contiguous line.
The docstring and tests are modified accordingly.
Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso <jordigh@octave.org> [Mon, 30 Jun 2014 10:25:08 -0400] rev 995
fold: emit error message when folding a single revision
Previously, a confusing error state would happen if the revision set
to fold was a singleton.
Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso <jordigh@octave.org> [Mon, 30 Jun 2014 10:27:15 -0400] rev 994
fold: clarify message for empty revision set and abort instead (BC)
I find it clearer that there are no revisions to fold because none
were specified. Otherwise it seems ambiguous: maybe there are no
revisions to fold because it's impossible to fold whatever was given?
In analogy of other commands that are given no revisions (e.g. strip,
graft), this is also now an abort instead of a mere error message,
which is a BC.