RFC: dealing with dead, anonymous feature branches

[Martin Geisler]

Augie Fackler <durin42 at gmail.com> writes:

> On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:13 AM, Martin Geisler <mg at aragost.com> wrote:
>> Augie Fackler <durin42 at gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> Now that I think of it, the scenario where T adds a cross branch tag
>> for Y is already a problem today: if I only clone C, then my .hgtags
>> file has a dangling reference to Y.
>>
>> In other words: the consequences of dead branches are not new. All that
>> changes is the heads that are pushed/pulled by default and you can
>> already get yourself into the same problems today with 'hg clone -r'.
>
> Sort of. You're proposing to not propagate dead branches *by default*,
> which is a significant behavior change, especially in this tagging
> case.

Yeah, but only if people create their tags while being on the "wrong"
branch.

> Most users I know just do 'hg clone' without trying to be clever about
> -r.

Sure, I also never use -r when cloning, or #branch for that matter.
About #branch -- Henrik said on IRC that they use the #branch syntax a
lot and that they basically never clone an entire repository. So he felt
that pushing the abandoned branches to the server is okay, since people
wont pull them again anyway.

-- 
Martin Geisler

See my Mercurial presentation: http://vimeo.com/11497288
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial-devel/attachments/20100520/adb0832a/attachment.pgp>