Sebastien Roy wrote:
>> Are you sure the extra changesets don't make your future merges more
>> complicated?
>
> I'm not sure. I do know that the ipobs-specific changed files don't
> cause merge problems (they would have with teamware).
Yes, with teamware the initial issues would be a lot worse since it
didn't detect that the content was identical hence the changesets could
be collapsed.
But I don't have any experience with post-initial merges in mercurial
with "extra" change sets from previous merges.
> As long as we keep the original hg repos with a history of past
> changesets around, then I'm fine with doing a recommit to collapse out
> the ipobs development changesets.
Just let me know the names of original repos.
> In order to make sure that the merge burden is minimal for this exercise
> (and because there were some minor changes made to the ipobs bits that
> were integrated that weren't applied to clearview-ipobs), I'll advance
> the clearview-ipobs repo to the snv_103 label and do a merge there.
> That way, when we reparent clearview-noipmp, the set of changesets to
> merge will be a small known quantity.
OK
Erik
