hg equivalent of git stash

[Mark Williamson]

> > Well, stash does a bit more than that, but arguably that's getting
> > closer to
> > mq-type functionality anyhow.
>
> Yes and no.  Since stash is so easy
<snip>
>
> it's much easier for those of us whose needs are that simple.  While
> mq would certainly work, it's not nearly as user friendly *for this
> use case*.

I was thinking more that the support for multiple levels of stashed stuff in 
git is getting a bit closer to mq-type functionality.  For stashing one level 
of changes, stash definitely seems nice and simple.

For the shelve extension, I found the following links:
http://www.nabble.com/-ANN--shelve-extension-td12696573.html
http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/index.cgi/ShelveExtension

There may be some more up-to-date information on the status of shelve 
somewhere...

It sounds to me like either (something like) shelve or mq will serve as a 
stash substitute in the majority of cases...

Cheers,
Mark

> > If neither shelve (closest thing by the sounds of it) or mq does
> > what people
> > want, an "hg stash" extension should be a doable project for
> > somebody.  I
> > guess that doesn't help users directly, though.
>
> I'm going to give shelve a try, hopefully tonight.
>
> Peace,
> Phillip



-- 
Push Me Pull You - Distributed SCM tool (http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/pmpu/)