Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: new feature: 'mtn pluck'

[Justin Patrin]

On 7/7/06, Nathaniel Smith <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 06, 2006 at 12:49:25PM -0700, Justin Patrin wrote:
> > Wow, cool! I'd like to think that my screwing around with mtnpatch
> > pushed this up to the top of the list but perhaps I'm giving myself
> > too much credit. ;-)
>
> Well, while I don't really mean to _encourage_ nagging, the OE folks
> who asked about this every week for 2 months did give me some
> impression of how urgently desired the feature was :-).

I didn't mean to nag for cherrypicking, which is why I created my
script. I'm glad monotone has real support for it now, though. :-)
Thanks much.

> > A few questions:
> > 1) Does this work cross-branch as well? I would assume it does since
> > branches are just a special kind of cert, but I'd like to be sure.
>
> Yes, it does.
>
> > 2) Does this apply renames, deletes, and adds to the workspace as well
> > or will the "add", "delete", and "rename" commands have to be run
> > manually?
>
> No, they're taken care of for you.
>
> > A request:
> > I was planning on making a wrapper script to my mtnpatch which did
> > exactly what this does (pull changes from a rev and apply them with
> > mtnpatch), but I will obviously not need that now. One thing I meant
> > to add to it was automatic population of the rev #('s) to the commit
> > message in _MTN/ and/or a special cert with rev ids so as to have some
> > record of what was cherry-picked. Could one or both of these be added
> > to "pluck"?
>
> The former is already added -- it adds a line to _MTN/log, which comes
> up as the default commit message when you hit "commit".

Ah, good. Sorry I didn't just try myself, but I have never had much
luck trying to compile monotone.

> The latter would be nice, but requires a bit more infrastructure --
> need some way to record certs in the workspace to be added at commit
> time, ways to let people look at those certs, modify them,
> documentation for above, etc.  All pretty straightforward, just
> someone would need to sit down and work on it for a few hours.

Understood. "pluck" is definately useful as it already is. :-)

--
Justin Patrin