Branchident extension for Mercurial 1.4

[Adrian Buehlmann]

On 20.11.2009 10:03, Sune Foldager wrote:
> Adrian Buehlmann wrote:
>> That doesn't answer my question. You still have to specify
>> a branch name for the "has no branch name" changesets.
> 
> I don't see why we need those; all our changesets should reside on some
> branch.
> 
>> That branch name could be "none", for example. But the question then
>> is: why can't that name *not* be "default"?
>> So the basic question is: what is your motivation for not having
>> a default branch?
>> What are you trying to achieve (or avoid)?
> 
> We have a branch name policy in place, which uses multi-part names
> separated with /, such as core/dev, core/stable etc. We have no need or
> use for a branch called 'default', and it would be unclear what team it
> belonged to as well.
> 
>> You can rename branches to anything. So you could rename your
>> "don't have a branch name" branches to let's say "none".
>> The question is: what behavior do you expect from a branch
>> that has its branch name removed?
> 
> I don't know; I guess I would never remove a branch (without setting a
> new one), so as long as the branchident code doesn't treat 'default' in
> a special way, everything should be fine :)
> 

It *does* treat default special. But I don't think you would have
a problem with that, since you never assign that branch name to
any changeset as you say.

branchident only assigns changesets to the default branch if
the user says so (at lest, that's the intention).

So, just don't rename your branches to default :)

The branchident extension treats all branches that have a
branch name which is not 'default' in the absolute same way.

There isn't even a "remove branch name" command in branchident.

So, I think, branchident should work fine out of the box for your use
case (modulo errors in design and implementation I don't know of yet,
obviously :).