2009/7/27 Adrian Buehlmann <adr...@cadifra.com>
> On 25.07.2009 02:07, Adrian Buehlmann wrote:
> > On 24.07.2009 17:58, Steve Borho wrote:
> >> Now that 0.8.1 is out the door, it's time to concentrate on 0.9.
> >>
> >> The first large steps will be happening soon. I am going to apply
> >> names to the two existing lines of development. The 0.8 line of
> >> development, which is present in both the stable and crew
> >> repositories, will be given a branch name of '0.8'. The 0.9 line of
> >> development, which is only present on the crew repository, will be
> >> given a branch name of '0.9'.
> >
> > Another rough idea to check:
> >
> > What about introducing just the branch name "stable"?
> >
> > The default branch could take over what's currently in crew repo.
> >
> > The "stable" branch could take over what's currently in stable repo.
> >
> > This would save us from a proliferation of branch names.
> >
>
> An interesting difference to the (current) split repo
> situation is the following:
>
> Assume you have some changes done in the default branch
> (corresponds to crew repo) in the combined repo like this
> (csets 3283:3285):
>
> > hg glog -l6
> o changeset: 3285:d49ba8fe1204
> | tag: tip
> | user: Adrian Buehlmann <adr...@cadifra.com>
> | date: Mon Jul 27 19:16:14 2009 +0200
> | summary: hack 3
> |
> o changeset: 3284:485eee4a1ee4
> | user: Adrian Buehlmann <adr...@cadifra.com>
> | date: Mon Jul 27 19:15:42 2009 +0200
> | summary: hack 2
> |
> o changeset: 3283:3c03993d0625
> | user: Adrian Buehlmann <adr...@cadifra.com>
> | date: Mon Jul 27 19:15:06 2009 +0200
> | summary: hack 1
> |
> o changeset: 3282:1231e67c6c38
> |\ parent: 3269:43a71c9d707c
> | | parent: 3281:8087f1733038
> | | user: Adrian Buehlmann <adr...@cadifra.com>
> | | date: Sat Jul 25 12:51:02 2009 +0200
> | | summary: merge with stable
> | |
> | @ changeset: 3281:8087f1733038
> | | branch: stable
> | | user: Steve Borho <st...@borho.org>
> | | date: Thu Jul 23 22:46:53 2009 -0500
> | | summary: doc: recommend sphinx 0.6 or later
> | |
> | o changeset: 3280:6a46b7f1a4a9
> | | branch: stable
> | | user: Steve Borho <st...@borho.org>
> | | date: Thu Jul 23 22:45:44 2009 -0500
> | | summary: manifest: include doc sources in tar files
> | |
>
> Now, assume we wanted to do a release, also containing everything
> from the default branch.
>
> In the old system, the csets 3283:3285 would have been
> in crew ("main") repo and Steve would have just pulled them
> into stable and tagged the release.
>
> In the combined repo approach with the named branch "stable",
> Steve would probably then have to do something like:
>
> > hg par
> changeset: 3285:d49ba8fe1204
> tag: tip
> user: Adrian Buehlmann <adr...@cadifra.com>
> date: Mon Jul 27 19:16:14 2009 +0200
> summary: hack 3
>
> > hg up stable
> 19 files updated, 0 files merged, 1 files removed, 0 files unresolved
>
> > hg par
> changeset: 3281:8087f1733038
> branch: stable
> user: Steve Borho <st...@borho.org>
> date: Thu Jul 23 22:46:53 2009 -0500
> summary: doc: recommend sphinx 0.6 or later
>
> > hg merge -r default
> 20 files updated, 0 files merged, 0 files removed, 0 files unresolved
> (branch merge, don't forget to commit)
>
> > hg ci -m"merge with default"
>
> > hg tag 0.8.2
>
> Giving the following result:
>
> > hg glog -l8
> @ changeset: 3287:ecb146ecbe60
> | branch: stable
> | tag: tip
> | user: Adrian Buehlmann <adr...@cadifra.com>
> | date: Mon Jul 27 19:54:22 2009 +0200
> | summary: Added tag 0.8.2 for changeset dad86830ec19
> |
> o changeset: 3286:dad86830ec19
> |\ branch: stable
> | | tag: 0.8.2
> | | parent: 3281:8087f1733038
> | | parent: 3285:d49ba8fe1204
> | | user: Adrian Buehlmann <adr...@cadifra.com>
> | | date: Mon Jul 27 19:54:13 2009 +0200
> | | summary: merge with default
> | |
> | o changeset: 3285:d49ba8fe1204
> | | user: Adrian Buehlmann <adr...@cadifra.com>
> | | date: Mon Jul 27 19:16:14 2009 +0200
> | | summary: hack 3
> | |
> | o changeset: 3284:485eee4a1ee4
> | | user: Adrian Buehlmann <adr...@cadifra.com>
> | | date: Mon Jul 27 19:15:42 2009 +0200
> | | summary: hack 2
> | |
> | o changeset: 3283:3c03993d0625
> | | user: Adrian Buehlmann <adr...@cadifra.com>
> | | date: Mon Jul 27 19:15:06 2009 +0200
> | | summary: hack 1
> | |
> | o changeset: 3282:1231e67c6c38
> |/| parent: 3269:43a71c9d707c
> | | parent: 3281:8087f1733038
> | | user: Adrian Buehlmann <adr...@cadifra.com>
> | | date: Sat Jul 25 12:51:02 2009 +0200
> | | summary: merge with stable
> | |
> o | changeset: 3281:8087f1733038
> | | branch: stable
> | | user: Steve Borho <st...@borho.org>
> | | date: Thu Jul 23 22:46:53 2009 -0500
> | | summary: doc: recommend sphinx 0.6 or later
> | |
> o | changeset: 3280:6a46b7f1a4a9
> | | branch: stable
> | | user: Steve Borho <st...@borho.org>
> | | date: Thu Jul 23 22:45:44 2009 -0500
> | | summary: manifest: include doc sources in tar files
> | |
>
> The merge 3286 would not have been necessary (not even possible) with the
> (current) split repo approach. The merge corresponds to the
> previous "pulling crew into stable" action.
I fail to understand this. If I had a split repo, why can I not do
hg par
cset 3281:xxxx
hg pull crew
hg merge
hg ci -m "merge with crew"
hg par
cset: 3286:xxxxx
parent: 3281:xxxx
parent: 3285:xxxx
hg tag 0.8.2
As I understand it, the only difference is if csets are labled with a branch
or not. The same goes for the two following examples.
Regards,
Peer
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Tortoisehg-discuss mailing list
Tortoisehg-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tortoisehg-discuss
