On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 10:39:01 +0900 "Stephen J. Turnbull" <step...@xemacs.org> wrote: > Executive summary: > > If we're really serious about serializing the public branches, mq > seems to be the way to go.
I really think that at this point we should continue practicing with the current setup before deciding on refinements or changes. > > 6. Use "hg strip" (dangerous!) to delete the local merges to 3.2 and > > "default". Leave the original commit in "3.1" alone. > > I would suggest "hg strip --keep" which leaves the working copy > unchanged. Now, "hg strip" should definitely be absent of any recommended or even suggested workflow. It's a power user tool for the experimented developer/admin. Not the average hg command. By the way, whether or not mq gets used is pretty much anyone's private decision (unless we decide that patches must get split into logical units and mailbombed for review ala mercurial-devel, which would be a significant departure from our development habits). 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
