On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 12:24 AM, Florian Bösch <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Apr 29, 8:45 pm, Bruce Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Since there is still some confusion about branches in which development
> > should occur, you should also mention which branch (1.2dev or
> > 1.1-maintenance) these patches were made against, and which ones you are
> > asking someone to make commits in (or whether you're leaving that
> entirely
> > up to someone else's decision).
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but you can't take changes made on some hg
> branch and apply them just to another branch. Afaik the only way to
> get changes from one branch to another is merging the two branches.
> This is different tough with patch queues. Patch queues care about the
> file structure of the working copy, and can be qpushed and qpoped, if
> you want to switch to a different branch you make an qpop, update -c,
> qpush.
>
> It might be worthwhile to think about patch queues in the context of
> code contribution with mercurial, since they offer a couple advantages
> over just plain patches over ML etc.
> - Can be revisioned/shared (as patch hg repos)
> - Can be tried out, merged, worked on without changing the history of
> the current repository
> - Make porting the same change across multiple branches easy
> - Alow continous integration for reworks of the same changeset until
> it gets accepted while other changes come in from upstream without
> scattering the changeset work across multiple intermixed changesets or
> running the risk of creating unintended unnamed branches
> - complement the lack of a (git flavour) staging area in hg
>
>
That all sounds good to me. I personally know nothing about it, being very
new to hg (so thanks for the info). If you wanted to propose or point to a
"best practices" process we should be following, e.g. as we fix bugs in
1.2dev and want to port them to 1.1-maintenance (or vice versa), or for
external changes like those from Joe Wreshnig's clone, that would be great
(IMHO) (but we better start a new thread for that discussion). (BTW I am
only speaking for myself here, and my guess is a bunch of others on the list
know a lot more about this.)

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"pyglet-users" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/pyglet-users?hl=en.

Reply via email to