Concatenating changesets

[Russ Brown]

Peter Arrenbrecht wrote:
>>> A changeset should be a single well-defined change. Which means it
>>> generally should be small. Combining changesets is generally (but not
>>> always) a step in the wrong direction.
>>>
>> I agree with this completely. However, I often find that a given range
>> of changesets need to be considered as a set or they make little sense
>> on their own (i.e the logical steps to developing a larger change). This
>> brings me to a feature that I think would be really useful: some concept
>> changeset 'grouping'.
> 
> Couldn't tags be used as a poor man's substitute for this, as in tag
> "feature-xy" means this is where feature xy is complete? Although I do
> realize this might clutter up the tag space a bit.
> -peter

That would tell you where the 'group' ended, but not where it started.

Another example use: hg log <groupid> just gives you the changes in that 
group.

-- 

Russ