Mercurial Now Has commit --amend

Mercurial 2.2.1 is out, and, among other new features and improvements, the commit command now has a --amend option. Git has had this for a while. Before 2.2 you could get the same functionality in Mercurial by using the mq extension, but it took at least 3 commands (qimport, qrefresh, qfinish). It's nice that you can do it with just one command now. Mercurial's relatively new phases come into play with --amend in that, by default, they will prevent you from amending a commit that has been pushed to or pulled from a remote repository. It's a nice little safety net to have, and of course you can override that behavior if you need.

It's nice to see this incredibly capable and easy-to-use tool get even better.

Comments

Vernon Mauery said…
It sounds like you will soon be able to just put an "alias hg='git'" in your .bashrc and be good to go. Ahhh, just join the dark side and leave your safety nets behind. :)
May 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM
Ryan said…
I thought Mercurial's equivalent to Git's amend feature was to use rollback followed by commit.
May 10, 2012 at 3:22 PM
Bryan said…
Ryan, that is another way you could amend a commit in mercurial, but it has caveats. rollback rolls back the last transaction, so if the last command that you did was commit, rollback followed by commit will work fine. If you have done a commit, and then some other command like, say, a pull, rollback won't put the commit back in your working copy, it will undo the pull. I'm pretty sure rollback won't save the commit message when it rolls back a commit, so if you want to just edit the commit message it's not going to be much help there either.
May 10, 2012 at 8:11 PM
Anonymous said…
Well if you had pulled since the commit you wanted to amend, then you also couldn't use git commit --amend. You would need to rebase instead. AFAIK (that's how I do it, at any rate).
May 10, 2012 at 11:03 PM
Bryan said…
hg pull doesn't do a merge like git pull does. From what I understand it's more like git fetch. You can still hg commit --amend after an hg pull, as I assume you could after a git fetch.
May 11, 2012 at 6:40 AM
Anonymous said…
Yes indeed; a bad assumption on my part, that.
May 12, 2012 at 10:35 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

SystemVerilog Fork Disable "Gotchas"

This is a long post with a lot of SystemVerilog code. The purpose of this entry is to hopefully save you from beating your head against the wall trying to figure out some of the subtleties of SystemVerilog processes (basically, threads). Subtleties like these are commonly referred to in the industry as "Gotchas" which makes them sound so playful and fun, but they really aren't either. I encourage you to run these examples with your simulator (if you have access to one) so that a) you can see the results first hand and better internalize what's going on, and b) you can tell me in the comments if this code works fine for you and I'll know I should go complain to my simulator vendor. OK, I'll start with a warm-up that everyone who writes any Verilog or SystemVerilog at all should be aware of, tasks are static by default. If you do this: module top; task do_stuff ( int wait_time); #wait_time $display ( "waited %0d, then did stuff" , wa
Read more

'git revert' Is Not Equivalent To 'svn revert'

I just learned that if you have some changes in your working tree that you want to get rid of, you don't type 'git revert' like you might guess. No, that's what cvs, subversion, mercurial, and bazaar (to name a few) use revert to mean, but not git. With git, revert is used to undo actual commits. Thankfully, you can undo your revert with another 'git revert', I just learned. So let me repeat to be clear, if you have changes to your working files that you want to abandon, DO NOT do this: git revert HEAD That will undo your last commit. Do this instead: git reset --hard HEAD I'm glad I have that straightened out now. I'm wondering if /etc was really a good place for me to start out playing with git. UPDATE: Nearly two years later and I'm still getting comments on this. I'm glad I've been able to help people out this way. The discussion in the comments is good, and one thing I'd like to point out is that I now always use
Read more

Put /etc Under Revision Control (with git)

UPDATE : There is a much easier way now : sudo aptitude install etckeeper There, now etc is under revision control and changes are automatically committed with a helpful message after you install new packages. Thanks for the tip, Marcelo! Read on for the original blog entry. --- I put my /etc directory under revision control. I used git. It's awesome. Not that I think I'm going to wholesale copy my /etc from one machine to another, nor because I'm going to branch my /etc directory and spend weeks developing some cool new feature (whatever that would look like...) and then merge it back into the main branch. No, it's mostly because I like the idea of having the big "undo" option that having things under revision control provides. Having to commit changes and write check-in comments when I make changes helps me stay more organized too. It's never good when I go in willy-nilly to make a "quick change" to some configuration file. I r
Read more