Thanks a lot Juan. I'm not advocating GitHub, just pointing out that there may be other people with the same background with similar confusions.
The way hg works is different than git. In git you branch for a feature, > in hg you clone per feature; so you don't upgrade your clone unless you > want to "rebase" your changes before opening the issue asking for merge. This was the missing concept. But I'm not sure it is really like that. I've searched a bit and I can do the following: After I clone to my local machine vim .hg/hgrc and add the line remote = https://code.google.com/p/pyglet/ Then, using hg pull remote followed by hg update brings the working tree to the current state of pyglet. From here I can commit and push to my remote repository in google. So, a possible working flow is: 1. clone to google ("default") 2. clone to local rep 3. add remote = https://code.google.com/p/pyglet/ to .hg/hgrc 4. create a branch 5. make changes and commit 6. hg pull remote followed by hg update (to update your code to the latest version/resolve merge conflicts) 7. push to your remote 8. fill a ticket with the link the branch in your remote Any suggestions/improvements to this? I was hoping to add a (more verbosed) list like this to contribute.xml. Cheers, Jorge -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pyglet-users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pyglet-users. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
