mercurial at 11238: 10 new changesets (3 stable)

[Henrik Stuart]

On 04-06-2010 09:16, Alexander Solovyov wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 09:41, Dirkjan Ochtman <dirkjan at ochtman.nl> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 21:42, Henrik Stuart <hg at hstuart.dk> wrote:
>>> Right you are. Pushed an updated patch utilising your journal
>>> suggestion. Thanks.
>>
>> I know I'm a little late to the party, but have we considered some
>> other scheme for doing multiple queues? For example, by having
>> multiple series files in a single directory?
>>
>> (It would be nice for keeping multiple stacks of patches in a single
>> repository... But on the other hand the current behavior might be
>> nicer for perusing other's patch queue repositories.)
> 
> I'd rather have one directory containing all patch queues, since this
> way .hg/ directory is not polluted with patch directories and I easily
> can take some patch queue from other guy.

At the very least we need to maintain the patches/ dir for backwards
compatibility. There was also a suggestion to hide most of it away in a
separate directory, but others were fine with just reserving
.hg/patches* to mq. There are, of course, advantages and disadvantages
to both solutions. :o)

I don't think it matters much if you have to write vim
.hg/patches-foo/series or vim .hg/mq/foo/series (and we'd still need to
have .hg/patches for backwards compatibility at any rate).

-- 
Kind regards,
  Henrik Stuart