问题描述
我知道 Rebase 是一个(捆绑的)扩展名，而嫁接是一项核心功能(取代了移植(捆绑销售)扩展名.
I know Rebase is a (bundled) extension, while Graft is a core feature (that replaced the Transplant (bundled) extension).
graft 记录为:
graft is documented as:
此命令使用Mercurial的合并逻辑来复制其他分支中的单个更改，而无需合并历史图中的分支.有时称为反向移植"或采摘樱桃".
This command uses Mercurial's merge logic to copy individual changes from other branches without merging branches in the history graph. This is sometimes known as 'backporting' or 'cherry-picking'.
rebase 记录为:
rebase is documented as:
- 在分支之间移动变更集
- 线性化"历史记录
- 重新排列变更集
- 将多个更改合为一个更改集
- moving changesets between branches
- "linearizing" history
- reordering changesets
- collapsing multiple changes into one changeset
两者似乎都使用合并在分支之间移动或复制变更集.
Both seem to use merging to move or copy changesets between branches.
嫁接副本.调整动作.但是rebase --keep复制.
Graft copies. Rebase moves. But rebase --keep copies.
通常，我似乎可以实现以任何一种方式复制变更集的目标.我使用哪一个无关紧要?我什么时候比另一个更喜欢?
So often it seems I can accomplish my goal of copying a changeset either way.Does it matter which one I use? When should I prefer one over the other?
例如仅在复制到另一个名为 的分支时才应使用嫁接吗?或仅在只有一个变更集的情况下?
E.g. should graft only be used when copying to a different named branch? Or only when there's just a single changeset?
Edit:可能是rebase是嫁接的潜在不安全超集，但只能在开发过程中与draft变更集一起使用以编辑本地历史记录，而嫁接是可以与维护期间用于后向移植的变更集?
Could it be that rebase is a potentially unsafe superset of graft, but can only be used with draft changesets during development for editing local history, while graft is a safe subset of rebase that can be used with public changesets during maintenance for backporting?
推荐答案
hg graft允许樱桃采摘".例如，您可以运行hg graft -D "2085::2093 and not 2091"从其他版本仅复制一些更改.相比之下，hg rebase(带有或不带有--keep)将获取您指定的任何更改集以及其后代更改的所有 .
hg graft allows "cherry-picking," as you noted in your question. For example, you can run hg graft -D "2085::2093 and not 2091" to copy only some changes from another revision. By comparison, hg rebase (with or without --keep) will grab whatever changeset you specify and all of its decendant changes.
此外，rebase还允许您折叠变更集(使用--collapse).据我所知，graft没有.
Also, rebase allows you to collapse changesets (with --collapse). As far as I can tell, graft does not.
我注意到的另一个区别是:hg graft --edit 123使您可以将123版移植到工作目录并编辑提交消息.我找不到hg rebase等效项.不过，我应该指出，hg histedit还允许在重新设置基准时编辑提交消息.
One more difference I have noticed: hg graft --edit 123 lets you graft revision 123 to the working directory and edit the commit message. I can't find an hg rebase equivalent. I should point out, though, that hg histedit also allows for editing the commit message while rebasing.
我可能没有想到其他差异. SO社区:请随时在评论中指出这些问题，我会很乐意修改此答案以使其更加完整.
There are probably other differences that I am not thinking of. SO community: feel free to point those out in the comments, and I will happily revise this answer to make it more complete.
请参见 graft文档和 Rebase扩展文档以获取更多详细信息.
See the graft documentation and the Rebase Extension documentation for more details.
这篇关于在Mercurial中，汞嫁接和汞变基有何区别的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持！