[PATCH] add support for marking changesets as dead

[Martin Geisler]

Martin Geisler <mg at aragost.com> writes:

> Matt Mackall <mpm at selenic.com> writes:
>
>> I'm afraid this can only mean you haven't fully understood what
>> 'liquid' is about. The primary distinction liquid makes is 'these are
>> things that will never disappear' and 'these are things that might
>> disappear'. Whereas dead heads is distinguishing between 'these are
>> things we're keeping' and 'these are things you should drop'. To say
>> these are unrelated is.. puzzling. My mental models of how to
>> implement these two concepts are nearly identical.
>
> I sort of see what you mean here... however, it was my impression that

Heh, a cliffhanger! :)

What I meant that it is my impression that liquid changesets are
different in the sense that they give a promise about what you can rely
on, whereas the dead heads do the opposite: they mark something as
abandoned, and people may indeed already rely on the abandoned
changesets.

If this sounds dangerous, then yes and no... it's not dangerous since
nothing is ever deleted, but the dead heads wont solve the need for
communication between people. So if I'm trying to kill a branch and
someone keeps working on it, then we should discuss it outside of
Mercurial.

-- 
Martin Geisler

aragost Trifork
Professional Mercurial support
http://aragost.com/en/services/mercurial/blog/