StatesPlan - a draft of the sprint discussion about liquid hg

[Pierre-Yves David]

On Mon, May 09, 2011 at 09:47:16AM -0500, Matt Mackall wrote:

> > > Similarly, Henrik and Martin's work on dead heads shows up here as
> > > 'abandoned heads' mostly to illustrate that it's an orthogonal feature.
> > 
> > The machinery implementing "local" should be smart enough to also
> > support "abandoned".
> 
> Is that true? My theory is that "local" changesets will simply be pruned
> from the graph that's visible to remote clients (possibly by subclassing
> changelog). Clients (including old clients!) will not negotiate anything
> about them, nothing will be added or changed in the wire protocol,
> nothing will change in discovery, they simply won't be there. Nor will
> they be present in the web interface.

The initial design we made with timeless allow to pull and push local changeset
by explicitly specifying them (by node ID or bookmark).

If we just totaly hide them, without any way to get them it's much simpler. We
just need to define a smart way to prevent bookmark to disappear. (as, get the
first non public p1)

-- 
Pierre-Yves
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial-devel/attachments/20110512/dff0563c/attachment.pgp>