Should we use subrepos ourselves?

[Adrian Buehlmann]

On 18.08.2010 17:47, Steve Borho wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 10:40 AM, Colin Caughie
> <c.caughie at indigovision.com> wrote:
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: mercurial-devel-bounces at selenic.com [mailto:mercurial-devel-
>>> bounces at selenic.com] On Behalf Of Matt Mackall
>>> Sent: 18 August 2010 15:57
>>> To: Martin Geisler
>>> Cc: Mercurial Development List
>>> Subject: Re: Should we use subrepos ourselves?
>>>
>>> On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 16:51 +0200, Martin Geisler wrote:
>>>> Hi guys,
>>>>
>>>> I had a meeting with my customer today where we dicussed subrepos
>>> (as
>>>> usual) and half-joking, they suggested that we try using them
>>> ourselves
>>>> for the Mercurial repository...
>>>
>>> It might indeed help us improve subrepos. On the other hand, it's
>>> definitely not a good use case for them and other people might
>>> decide to
>>> follow our bad example.
>>
>> What about the TortoiseHg project? Seems like making hg a subrepo of TortoiseHg would be a good use case, and could result in improved subrepo support in both TortoiseHg and Mercurial itself.
> 
> I want to use subrepos for thg-winbuild, and perhaps thg itself (the
> shell extension C++ code could/should be split off).  But I would
> really like read-only subrepos before I do the former.
> 

Just be careful. You already have quite a couple of nearly insane
dependencies across repositories today for example for installer
modifications (WiX sources).

Not sure if it helps to make things even more complicated if you want
attract new contributors.