Am 04.07.2010 00:59, schrieb "Martin v. Löwis": >> This is perhaps a naive question, but hat do you gain with the >> intermediate mirror clone of upstream? (Other than filling more of your >> disk?) > > In addition to the answer you got: this way of working is also the > process that I arrived at, independently. > > I see two uses, both based around the problem "creating a full clone > will take a long time - much longer than a subversion checkout". > 1. if I want several local checkouts (e.g. for testing separate > features), I can clone them all from the local copy (thereby > also preserving space, compared to independent clones) > 2, throwing away local changes is not that easy in Mercurial, > if you have committed them already.
Of course, in SVN throwing away committed changes is completely impossible :) > There are extensions to > uncommit, but they are discouraged and have limitations. I wouldn't say that. strip works well and it does so logically, once one understands the DAG. The only thing discouraged is to strip changesets once pushed to the public repo, but that holds as well for getting rid of the changesets by making a new clone without them. cheers, Georg -- Thus spake the Lord: Thou shalt indent with four spaces. No more, no less. Four shall be the number of spaces thou shalt indent, and the number of thy indenting shall be four. Eight shalt thou not indent, nor either indent thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to four. Tabs are right out. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
