William Deegan <[email protected]> writes: > Martin, > On Oct 14, 2012, at 10:40 PM, Martin Geisler <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Gary Oberbrunner <[email protected]> writes: >> >> This option 3 should be the safest: you mark the head (8764000) as >> closed locally and push to Bitbucket. You can then make a new commit >> From somewhere good (f461304) and that will be it. I've done that >> here: >> >> https://bitbucket.org/mg/scons/changesets >> >> The closed head is hidden from 'hg heads' by default and if a branch >> has nothing but closed heads, then the branch itself is hidden from >> 'hg branches'. That's all there is to this --close-branch mechanism. > > Could you list the commands to do this. (none of use are super > knowledgable on mercurial (yet:))?
I'm glad to see that Gary figured it out! >> Rewriting public history all depends on how many people you expect to >> annoy... if you get 10 pull requests per week and those people would >> need to recreate some work if you strip the Bitbucket repo, well then >> you might want to avoid it. If you get 1 pull request per week and if >> most contributors read this list, well then go ahead. > > Our pull request volume is usually ~1-3/week. If we do the strip, then > we would need to ask all forks to do the same if they'd already > merged? Yes, exactly. This is basically the key point that makes it hard to rewrite (or delete) public history -- it's spread beyond your control. If you do try to delete some history anyway, then you need to run around and stamp it out everywhere. That can be done in a company where you know where all the clones are, but it's normally considered too cumbersome for an open source project. -- Martin Geisler
pgph8kqgXsVsw.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Scons-dev mailing list [email protected] http://two.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
