Martin Pool wrote:
> On 12 February 2010 14:02, Ian Clatworthy <email address hidden> wrote:
>> Well the exception is certainly ugly in any case. Maybe we should trap a
>> non-mainline revision argument and suggest other commands?
>
> If people explicitly ask to uncommit to a non-mainline revision I
> don't see why we should not allow that. It probably just needs the
> check removed.
>
The reason it fails is because we log the mainline. Also because at one
point doing "uncommit -r X" actually meant "set_last_revision(x-1)". I
think we now just do "set_last_revision(x)" so that should be simpler.
John
=:->
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Martin Pool wrote:
> On 12 February 2010 14:02, Ian Clatworthy <email address hidden> wrote:
>> Well the exception is certainly ugly in any case. Maybe we should trap a
>> non-mainline revision argument and suggest other commands?
>
> If people explicitly ask to uncommit to a non-mainline revision I
> don't see why we should not allow that. It probably just needs the
> check removed.
>
The reason it fails is because we log the mainline. Also because at one revision( x-1)". I revision( x)" so that should be simpler.
point doing "uncommit -r X" actually meant "set_last_
think we now just do "set_last_
John
=:->
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- enigmail. mozdev. org/
1W1sACgkQJdeBCY SNAAPGLgCgh1Qz/ SrFSHcoaj+ UPKcviX2C aLRJDHe+ rs72eXrxy
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://
iEYEARECAAYFAkt
5zIAn1tbiOrWbe/
=kOJ7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----