On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 01:35:43PM +0200, Zbynek Winkler wrote: > So, now I'm leaning very much back towards having branch names that > are not leaves in the namespace -- because this hierarchical nesting > is more expressive in this case. Even if it does really confuse > everyone used to svn/darcs/bzr/hg/..., with their branches as leaf > URLs :-). > > I do not think this is true for hg. You can easily branch into the same > space. I've just tried something along the lines of > > hg init . > hg clone . subbranch > echo "Hey" > fff > hg st > ? ffff > hg add ffff > hg ci > cd subbranch > hg pull > > Works just fine. I can pull either . or ./subbranch. Unless you meant > something else?
No, that's what I meant. Thanks for the comment. What happens if mainline happens to contain a file name "subbranch"? Does looking at this scheme make you nauseous from the way it violates the expectation baked into hg's model that a branch location contains the files in that branch, not other branches? > Unless anyone has any ideas on a less confusing way to accomplish this > goal? > > Maybe branch renaming could help? When branching of the trunk create a > leave. Afterwords rename the .roster-no-hash to .roster-no-hash/trunk and > create another named .roster-no-hash/new-crazy-idea? Hmm, good point -- branch renaming is already baked into this scheme anyway. This seems a little elaborate to go through all the time, though; I worry a lot about defaults because they're what tends to guide what people end up doing in the common case. A possibility that no-one thinks of isn't so useful; a possibility that will make users's lives easier should be nudged towards their awareness... -- Nathaniel -- "The problem...is that sets have a very limited range of activities -- they can't carry pianos, for example, nor drink beer." _______________________________________________ Monotone-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
