D1551: remotenames: consider existing data while storing newer data

grim (Gary Kramlich) phabricator at mercurial-scm.org
Wed Dec 6 13:53:22 EST 2017

grim added a comment.

  As an outsider looking in, I can see both points of view here.  But as someone maintaining a large code base here I have to say I agree with Sean.  The whole "we'll fix it later thing" is crap.  It never happens as long as the code "works good enough".  Case in point, I'm currently systematically removing 228 #if 0's from the Pidgin code base, most of which were put there more than a decade ago.
  In my experience there are two times when code in this situation can/will be cleaned up.  Before it's merged or when someone working on a bug fix/feature get's completely frustrated with it's state and ends up refactoring the crap out of it.  Right now this feature is at the former but this discussion seems to be leading to the later, which is actively buying into the long term maintenance cost.  Perhaps Mercurial can afford that cost, but this is not something I would advise/condone on my own projects.

  rHG Mercurial


To: pulkit, #hg-reviewers, durin42
Cc: grim, smf, durin42, dlax, mercurial-devel

More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list