On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 8:58 PM, Benjamin Richter<[email protected]> wrote: > Hello developers. :-) > > I noticed that makepkg handles Mercurial repositories differently from > CVS/SVN/Bazaar/etc. With the others, $newpkgver is either computed using > $(date ...) or retrieved from the online repository and the PKGBUILD is > responsible for retrieving the contents as it is demonstrated here: > http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_CVS_%6_SVN_PKGBUILD_guidelines. > > Only with hg the repository is automatically cloned, pulled and updated: >
I noticed this inconsistency just recently looking at makepkg code, and I don't like it either. I quickly looked at your proposed solutions and I am not convinced (or maybe the first one a) ). My suggestions : 1) cloning in all cases (like a) ) one big? disadvantage is that all existing scm PKGBUILDs will have to be converted and I wonder if this method might be too restrictive in some cases, where someone want to clone a repo in a specific way. 2) removing hg / mercurial support This is the easiest one :D 3) implement a way to get the version with hg without cloning, like all other scm already have This is the nicest / most difficult (maybe impossible?) one :)
