subrepo grand plan
mads at kiilerich.com
Fri Oct 14 09:03:54 CDT 2011
On 10/14/2011 01:48 PM, David.Sedlock at lantiq.com wrote:
> So it would be great if the opposition to Martin's small improvement were reviewed.
I would like to add my 5 cents here:
Mercurial is no democracy. Mercurial is an open project with a smart and
strong leader with strong opinions. That is the main key to Mercurials
success (and possibly also to the limited success).
To be specific, that means that no-one has any authority to review
Matt's opposition and overrule it.
AFAICS the only feasible way forward for subrepos would be to try to
carefully follow and implement the hints given by Matt and see where
that will bring us.
Alternatively, if you know what you want and really want it, then it
might be an idea to just implement that, for example as an extension.
The maintenance overhead would probably be low if you push as much as
possible upstream. The risk would be low as long as you only tweak UI
and defaults (and thus only break upstreams UI stability rule) without
changing anything in the storage format. (Said with reference to
More information about the Mercurial-devel