[PATCH 0 of 4] A Branch Closing patch series

Matt Mackall mpm at selenic.com
Tue Jan 6 16:19:57 CST 2009


On Tue, 2009-01-06 at 16:42 -0500, John Mulligan wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 03, 2009 at 09:30:57PM +0100, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
> > On 23/12/2008 20:31, John Mulligan wrote:
> >> Feedback is very welcome.
> >
> > Matt, any more comments, or is this good to go?
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Dirkjan
> 
> Ditto. (Just trying to see what the status is.)

This all looks good so far, but I haven't dug into it deeply enough yet.
My remaining concerns are things like:

- are there behavioral changes to hg branches? (I assume so?)
- should there be? (probably yes)
- should we keep the 'old' notion of inactive heads?
- are there behavioral changes to hg heads? (unclear)
- should there be? (probably not?)
- what's the new cache format?
- is the new cache format good enough?

These are exactly the sorts of things people should include in their
changelogs to make reviewing easier. Otherwise, I need to spend a lot
more time going over the patch figuring out whether it's the right
thing, which increases the odds that something shiny will come along and
distract me.

-- 
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.



More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list