Bundle2 last call

Pierre-Yves David pierre-yves.david at ens-lyon.org
Thu Feb 5 06:46:18 CST 2015



On 02/04/2015 09:59 PM, Matt Mackall wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-02-04 at 21:57 +0000, Pierre-Yves David wrote:
>>
>> On 01/20/2015 08:33 PM, Matt Mackall wrote:
>>> Ok, I've looked over the bundle2 discussion to date and while I see some
>>> things that could be better, I don't see anything that I think will
>>> cause us significant pain in the future. So I'm inclined to move forward
>>> with turning on bundle2 in its current form at the start of the 3.4
>>> development cycle. So if there's anything you think MUST be fixed before
>>> we move forward, now's your chance to convince me.
>>
>> Ultimate call, I'll probably send a lazy patch with s/HG2Y/HG20/g
>> patches before the end of the week otherwise.
>
> We might consider just letting the 2Y stand, so as not to invalidate any
> of our field testing with churn.

My english foo fails short here. I'm not sure what you are trying to mean.

- If you are afraid that renaming the format break stuff I see this as 
an argument to change it. It should not and I would like to be warned 
early if it does,

- If you are afraid that currently deployed experiment using HG2Y get 
confused, I think it is easy to keep compabilitly between the 2 for a 
couple of month. Especially if the underlying format see no changes.

-- 
Pierre-Yves David


More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list