Experimental implementation of liquid-hg

Martin Geisler mg at lazybytes.net
Tue Jan 18 13:48:51 CST 2011


Matt Mackall <mpm at selenic.com> writes:

Hi everybody,

> The whole point of liquid is for people to avoid accidentally
> modifying or deleting or rebasing publicly-visible changesets.

I also discussed this with Pierre-Yves and the others at the Zurich
mini-sprint, but let me bring it up here again: do you think rebasing
publically-visible changesets is a big problem?

It's an honest question, I don't feel that we get many questions here or
on IRC of the form "Oh no, I just rebased something after pushing it to
my server! What should I do?"

In other words, while I can see how it is nice to make it more
well-defined what can and what cannot be changed, I don't see this as
the interesting problem since I don't really see it as a problem.

Maybe it is just because people have been burnt in the past and are now
very careful with using rebase? If so, then this kind of infrastructure
makes more sense since it would let people be more bold when rebasing,
knowing that Mercurial will stop them from being stupid.

-- 
Martin Geisler

Mercurial links: http://mercurial.ch/
-------------- 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/20110118/1069a2c3/attachment.pgp>


More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list