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

Martin Geisler mg at lazybytes.net
Mon Nov 14 02:09:02 CST 2011


Arne Babenhauserheide <arne_bab at web.de> writes:

> Am Sonntag, 13. November 2011, 16:38:52 schrieb Martin Geisler:
>> 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.
>
> Do you mean non-persistent feature branches? 

I mean branches where you use bookmarks to track them instead of using
named branches. Mercurial is happy enough to let you keep several heads
around, provided they are on different named branches.

> Would it suffice to allow pushing bookmarked heads with an
> --new-bookmarked-heads option (which you could also send permanently
> and which would also transfer all bookmarks on the pushed heads)?

No, that's not the point. Making 'hg push' and 'hg pull' not complain
about multiple heads all the time is the important part. Perhaps they
should only complain about multiple un-bookmarked heads.

-- 
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/20111114/2b080366/attachment.pgp>


More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list