Disable backing out merges?

[Didly]

On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 4:05 AM, Greg Ward <greg-hg at gerg.ca> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Matt Mackall <mpm at selenic.com> wrote:
>> Seems a bunch of people are trying to use backout to deal with broken
>> merges. That doesn't work:
>>
>> - it's not well-defined what the result should be
>> - we can't actually erase the problematic DAG edge
>>
>> So it seems like we should just refuse to do it until we get a lot
>> smarter here.
>
> +1
>
> Digression: have you (or anyone else) noticed people doing silly thing
> like merging default to branch 1.0 when they meant to go the other
> way? I was sufficiently worried about the possibility at work that I
> wrote a precommit hook to stop it. (And I have a mechanism to control
> everyone's .hgrc, so I can specify commit-time hooks.) Is this worth
> generalizing, e.g. should we have some way of specifying local merge
> policy and preventing dumb merges?

Greg,

could you give more details about your "mechanism to control everyone's .hgrc"?

As the person unofficially in charge of mercurial at my company, this
is something that I wish was built-in into mercurial (perhaps as an
extension).

Angel