subrepo grand plan
mpm at selenic.com
Thu Oct 20 10:32:31 CDT 2011
On Thu, 2011-10-20 at 13:43 +0200, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 22:21, Matt Mackall <mpm at selenic.com> wrote:
> > a) Work towards having commit/status/diff consistent AND recursive by
> > default
> > b) Make commitsubrepos False by default
> > c) Add your recursesubrepos option, None by default
> > My favorite is (a) because all work here is forward progress towards
> > having subrepos more uniformly integrated. This will make subrepos
> > better for everyone with no config settings needed. I think the big
> > hurdle here (getting these three commands consistent +
> > add/forget/remove) is really not that hard given the existing groundwork
> > you've set in.
> > I ought to have done (b) to start with or very early on, but the option
> > never occurred to me. Now I frankly think it's half a step backwards.
> > It'll solve a big issue for new users (great), but may upset some
> > existing users (which usually trumps). Given that we've got four months
> > until the next release this could possibly be in, I'd rather see us
> > hurry up and do (a).
> > And (c) I think is not especially better than the status quo. New users
> > will still have to find it to get the consistent experience, and then
> > when we finally do (a), they'll have to go back and turn it off. Then
> > there's collateral maintenance issues, tool awareness and so on. Given
> > that it's purely a stop-gap measure, it's a half-step backwards plus a
> > log to trip over when we start going forward again.
> I'm with Patrick in that I prefer (b) even now. I find his argument
> about predictability and scalability of performance compelling, but
> mostly I find recursive commit (by default) plain scary.
We'd need to add a -S switch to get the old behavior and a hint.
I'm a little concerned that this will bring development on subrepo
integration to a stand-still.
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.
More information about the Mercurial-devel