Le vendredi 04 mars 2011 à 14:03 -0800, Santoso Wijaya a écrit : > [...] publishing patches by referring to a remote repository, > rather than uploading the diff. > > > Is this a recommended workflow at this point, or should we > generate/attach patch files still? Both, for experimentation?
Pragmatically, I think we would still prefer patches, but Mercurial should make it much easier to maintain them - e.g. you can use mq (which is what Mercurial devs themselves use, actually). We can also experiment with other forms of publishing changes, but I think that would require the publisher to somehow collapses their own changesets, so that it finally amounts to reviewing a patch. In my opinion at least, it would be bad if we started integrating intermediate changesets leading to a final patch just because Mercurial allows us to do it. I think it's better if the public history line doesn't get obscured with work-in-progress changesets. Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ 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
