2010/6/15 "Martin v. Löwis" <mar...@v.loewis.de>: >> As a maintainer of the PyPI project, it makes your workflow simpler, >> >> - contributors can clone the repo, change the code and ask you for a pull >> - you can pull changes by direct hg commands, and merge them > > After using Mercurial in one project, I'm skeptical that this really makes > things simpler. I find it very hard to find out what changes a specific > clone has that I still need to integrate.
If the clone is used as an unsynced copy of the repository for various works, you are right, it can become a nightmare ! I think the best practice is to make sure the clone is a fresh synced one, containing only the commits you want to push in the "main" repo so the reviewer has a clean understanding when you ask for the pull; An alternative approach is to use the queue system Mercurial has, which are commands that create patches you can then send to the reviewers. You can even use a tool like CodeReview in that case. Then I guess I doesn't really matter if the main repo is svn or hg.. > Also, when merging with conflicts, > I find it very difficult to determine whether I merged all the conflicts > correctly (since the diff will show all changes, not just the conflicts). > > So I rather expect things to become more difficult when switching to hg. Well I guess it's up to you anyway :) > Regards, > Martin > -- Tarek Ziadé | http://ziade.org _______________________________________________ Catalog-SIG mailing list Catalog-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
