Martin v. Löwis <mar...@v.loewis.de> added the comment: > That sounds reasonable. So, can't we come up with a diff that does > both? The base revision sounds like a completely necessary piece of > info.
I believe there is a bug report against Mercurial to include the base revision even in git-style diffs, not sure what the status is. git itself includes the base revision in its diffs; I believe that Mercurial didn't dare to use the same syntax since the Mercurial hash wouldn't be a valid git hash. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue13210> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
