My understanding is that git branches are ideal for this. Barry
On Feb 8, 2013, at 7:20 PM, Satish Balay <balay at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > Barry/Jed/Sean, > > Should we have a recommended method of handling 'private branch' for > petsc developemnt? > > thanks, > Satish > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2013 16:24:46 -0600 (CST) > From: Satish Balay <balay at mcs.anl.gov> > To: Hong Zhang <hzhang at mcs.anl.gov> > Subject: Re: private branch of petsc-dev > > There might be different ways of doing it with different tradeoffs > with each method. > > Perhaps you might have to use bookmarks or something. I don't know > enough about this. > > One way do this is [similar to the way we do petsc-dev/petsc-3.3 split > work]: > > - have a separate petsc-dev clone somehwere as say petsc-dev-qlp. > > - you and Terrya will have a clone of this petsc-dev-qlp repo locally > where new code gets added. > > - pull/merge from current petsc-dev to petsc-dev-qlp regularly [if > this development has to be in sync with petsc-dev] > > - Only when everything is done/ready push from petsc-dev-qlp clone to > petsc-dev > > The drawback here is - the history of this work would be messy [with > all the merges etc..] > > The other way is: > > - have a separate petsc-dev clone somehwere as say petsc-dev-qlp. > > - you and Terrya will have a clone of this petsc-dev-qlp repo locally > where new code gets added. > > - *never* sync with petsc-dev until this work is done. > > - merge with petsc-dev when its done. [either merge - or rebase it over] > > The *never* sync with petsc-dev is a drawback for this. > > Perhaps Sean/Jed will have better responses. [wrt bookmarks] > > Satish > > On Fri, 8 Feb 2013, Hong Zhang wrote: > >> Satish, >> How to create a private branch of petsc-dev for me and >> Sou-Cheng (Terrya) Choi to develop new KSP miners-qlp? >> >> Should I use 'hg branch'? >> I tested, but got trouble on how to merge the branch back >> to the default repo. >> >> Hong >> >
