Using bookmarks in Mercurial itself

[Martin Geisler]

Idan Kamara <idankk86 at gmail.com> writes:

> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Martin Geisler <mg at aragost.com> wrote:
>> Idan Kamara <idankk86 at gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Of course no code is perfect. But if you have the option of not
>>> having that extra commit for the bug fix, which is what we strive
>>> for by sending patches to the list for others to review, would you
>>> not prefer that?
>>
>> Not necessarily. That way of thinking can be a waste of time --
>> trying to make the history look nice instead of letting it be
>> informative.
>
> I don't know, I guess it depends. When working on a series in an
> organized manner (patches split up nicely etc), I find it natural, not
> a waste of time.

You're right that it depends, no question about that. When I work by
myself I find that MQ can help me organize my thought very nicely.

> OTOH if you look at git's graph, it's not so easy on the eyes:
>
> http://paste.pocoo.org/show/416271/
> http://i.imgur.com/CoXmZ.png
>
> It does however, allow you to see all csets on a certain feature
> branch, next to each other in a nice way.

Ah, thanks for those pictures. That is indeed a nasty graph... but it's
not unlike the graphs I've seen from "real world" companies -- they are
often much too wide for graphlog to handle them in any sane way.

>> [...] Bitbucket just launched a nice 'pull request' feature that
>> would let us get some overview back: people make a pull request on
>> Bitbucket and we can reject/accept them there.
>
> Yeah that sounds nice, although I think the main review process should
> stay in the mailing list.

Yes, it probably should -- I also use my mail client as the central hub
for everything I do. The pull requests would be a way to publically list
the patches that need to be rewiewed and merged/rejected.

-- 
Martin Geisler

aragost Trifork
Professional Mercurial support
http://mercurial.aragost.com/kick-start/