4 ms·

It is kind of true, though. From Mercurial docs: >The public phase holds changesets that have been exchanged publicly. Changesets in the public phase are expec

by Miiko 4y ago

It is kind of true, though. From Mercurial docs: >The public phase holds changesets that have been exchanged publicly. Changesets in the public phase are expected to remain in your repository history and are said to be _immutable_ Note that in Git all history is mutable, even if published. Regarding 'backout' (and 'revert'), to the best of my knowledge, it does not revert commit, it creates a new one (reverting changes), and I frankly do not know is that's possible at all to amend commit in Mercurial (when I worked with it, that was definitely not possilbe, but that was a long time ago)

howinteresting 4y ago
In Mercurial all history is mutable too, there's just a UI failsafe that prevents you from mutating public history unless you manually override it. Git is just plain bad in this regard. hg backout is like git revert. Creating a new commit is correct if you want to e.g. propagate the change through continuous deployment. And hg commit --amend has existed for a long time.
- Miiko 4y ago
  Git has "reset" in addition to "revert" (the former mutates history but the latter does not). What Mercurial has for removing the wrong commit? For amend option - well, we switched to Git at time of Mercurial 2.1 (I said it was long time ago), did not notice they added this feature, sorry.
  - aayjaychan 4y ago
    that would be `hg prune` in modern Mercurial.
  - howinteresting 4y ago
    git reset does like 25 different things.
muxator 4y ago
On top of that, there is the notion of change set _obsolescence_: a change may be replaced by a newer one, effectively replacing it.
gmueckl 4y ago
You can do > hg commit --amend to change the topmost commit. Marking commits as public is mostly a safeguard against accidentally altering history that others may already depend upon. This is just there to provide awareness of the giant footguns hiding when editing history after it has been shared (git contains the same footguns without safeguards). You can revert the status of a commit from public to draft and then change it. Just like in git, it's very dangerous to do so, but hg makes it very obvious. The command is > hg phase --draft --force .

by Miiko 4y ago

howinteresting 4y ago

In Mercurial all history is mutable too, there's just a UI failsafe that prevents you from mutating public history unless you manually override it. Git is just plain bad in this regard. hg backout is like git revert. Creating a new commit is correct if you want to e.g. propagate the change through continuous deployment. And hg commit --amend has existed for a long time.

Miiko 4y ago
Git has "reset" in addition to "revert" (the former mutates history but the latter does not). What Mercurial has for removing the wrong commit? For amend option - well, we switched to Git at time of Mercurial 2.1 (I said it was long time ago), did not notice they added this feature, sorry.
- aayjaychan 4y ago
  that would be `hg prune` in modern Mercurial.
- howinteresting 4y ago
  git reset does like 25 different things.

muxator 4y ago

On top of that, there is the notion of change set _obsolescence_: a change may be replaced by a newer one, effectively replacing it.

gmueckl 4y ago

You can do > hg commit --amend to change the topmost commit. Marking commits as public is mostly a safeguard against accidentally altering history that others may already depend upon. This is just there to provide awareness of the giant footguns hiding when editing history after it has been shared (git contains the same footguns without safeguards). You can revert the status of a commit from public to draft and then change it. Just like in git, it's very dangerous to do so, but hg makes it very obvious. The command is > hg phase --draft --force .