Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Cherry-Picking, Renames, Etc.

[Nathaniel Smith]

On Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 09:07:50PM +0100, Joel Rosdahl wrote:
> Oren Ben-Kiki <address@hidden> writes:
> > Ah. I see. Question: does the new update allow me to specify the
> > target, as well as the base revision? That is, given:
> >
> >   A --> B --> C --> D
> >     \-> E -> working set
> >
> > Can I "monotone update $B $C"? Update has its own ideas about the
> > target revision, which seem inappropriate here.
> 
> No, the "new" update only takes one (optional) argument (the new
> working copy base). The current update command is not meant to be used
> for cherrypicking, but you can (ab)use it like this to cherrypick B
> --> C into a working copy based off E:
> 
>     monotone checkout C wc
>     cd wc
>     echo B >MT/revision
>     monotone update E
>
> I think Nathaniel had something like that in mind.

I see I have been far too oblique again :-)

When I talked about update and cherrypick being similar, I just meant
that the fancy new 'update' command uses the same algorithm as a
full-fledged cherrypick command would.  This isn't even a coincidence
-- we can think of 'update' as a particularly restricted version of
'cherrypick', that always cherrypicks the changes from E -> wc onto
some new revision.  (And stores the results of this operation in the
working directory, and discards the old working directory.)

'update' has always meant "change which version I'm working against";
the recent change just generalized this so you can change to an older
version, or a parallel version (like, say, if you realized that there
were horrible bugs in the revision you were working against, that made
it impossible to test your new changes, you could just 'update' back
to an older version and get work done while waiting for someone else
to fix those bugs).

Cherrypicking should be a separate command :-)

-- Nathaniel

-- 
  /* Tell the world that we're going to be the grim
   * reaper of innocent orphaned children.
   */
-- Linux kernel 2.4.5, main.c