branching: merge with stable

help: promote "amend" to important command Recent change to what command we advertise as "basic". It turn out "amend" was not part of one of them. Since "amend" is one of the core command of a rewriting workflow, we promote it to "basic command".

help: fix output for `hg help -e evolve` wrt 'touch' command Currently, when running `hg help -e evolve`, the output looks like this on my screen: touch create successors that are identical to their predecessors except With this change, it looks like this: touch create successors that are identical to their predecessors except for the changeset ID

help: remove a few commands from `hg` (no args) command list According to `hg help -e evolve`, the following commands come from the evolve extension: amend evolve fold metaedit next obslog pdiff previous prune pstatus split touch uncommit If one runs `hg` without arguments, commands that are prefixed with a ^ character are shown. From the previous list, this includes: evolve fold metaedit next previous prune split touch uncommit It feels several of these commands are not "basic commands" that someone who has never used hg before might care about. They probably also do not come close to passing the "toothbrush test": things that users are likely to use every day. This commit removes these items from the list: metaedit, touch, uncommit This means the following are kept: evolve fold next previous prune split

typos: fix typos in several locations A user at Google attempted to fix our local copy because they had noticed a typo (accross instead of across), but this will just get overwritten on our next import. This commit fixes that case and a few others that my editor found. Most of the typos were in comments, but user-visible output is changed in a few cases: - accross -> across - splitted -> split - ambigious -> ambiguous - evolvestte -> evolvestate (this is in a ui.debug, so not often seen) There is another typo that I wanted to fix, but didn't: 'supercede' is spelled 'superseed' in a few locations. I believe this is only internal to the extension, instead of being user-visible, so while it could probably be fixed easily, I wasn't 100% sure it didn't end up in a file on disk or something and might cause problems, so I left it alone.

topic: use more protective code to access current topic There are some code path where the operation is not properly initialized and lack the new attributes. While the lack of initialization, is suspicious and I've not be able to pin point case where this happens. Currently the code crash when it encounter this situation. So we make the code more resistant to this case to prevent bad user experience.

topic: use more protective code to access publishing code There are some code path where the operation is not properly initialized and lack the new attributes. While the lack of initialization, is suspicious and I've not be able to pin point case where this happens. Currently the code crash when it encounter this situation. So we make the code more resistant to this case to prevent bad user experience.