[PATCH 2 of 4] clone to master bookmark if available

[Victor Suba]

I really agree with what Martin said.

I would like to recommend DVCS for a project that takes several gigabytes of
working directory space, and takes over an hour to build from clean.
 Cloning
to separate folders for feature branches would be prohibitively expensive
without
some major refactoring of the project.

On the other hand I like other things about Mercurial which is why I
haven't just
recommended going to Git for that project.

Cheers,
Vic

On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 7:38 AM, Martin Geisler <mg at lazybytes.net> wrote:

> Arne Babenhauserheide <arne_bab at web.de> writes:
>
> > Am Donnerstag, 10. November 2011, 09:44:02 schrieb Victor Suba:
> >> The gittish way is that the bookmark's pulled from the remote aren't
> merged
> >> into your local
> >> namespace - they're tied to the alias of the remote, and they're
> treated as
> >> foreign heads that
> >> are ignored in push/pull commands.
> >
> > That’s one of the things I don’t like about git, so it’s not something
> > I would want replicated in Mercurial.
> >
> > In Mercurial you normally synchronize everything, so there’s no danger
> > of accidently forgetting to push something important. If you want to
> > only synchronize a part, you say so via hg pull -r <rev>. In that case
> > all revs not needed for that rev are ignored.
> >
> > Mercurial is not git, and I don’t want it to be git, because I
> > consider the behavior of Mercurial as far more useful than the one of
> > git.
>
> This difference is the key to why Git users can work with several
> feature branches in a single repository and why Mercurial normaly use
> seperate clones.
>
> Feature branches are a *super powerful* concept, but Mercurial fights
> you if you try to use them. It basically tries to make you merge all the
> heads into a single head -- no matter if you have put bookmarks on them
> or not.
>
> I think it's a real loss for us that we don't really support working
> with feature branches like this.
>
> (If you're concerned about getting all the branches, then I'm sure clone
> will keep giving you everything. So that's a non-issue.)
>
> --
> Martin Geisler
>
> Mercurial links: http://mercurial.ch/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mercurial-devel mailing list
> Mercurial-devel at selenic.com
> http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial-devel/attachments/20111113/d5736ccc/attachment.html>