Question about named branches

Ian Lewis ianmlewis at gmail.com
Fri Mar 28 04:33:15 CDT 2008


Trygve,

This is one of the problems of using named branches. You cannot selectively
push named branches. If each developer has his own repository why are you
creating named branches for each developer? Each developer essentially has
his own branch just by nature of having his own clone of the repository. And
determining who committed what change can be maintained by user name.

Ian

2008/3/28, Trygve Laugstøl <trygvis at inamo.no>:
>
> Hi
>
> Given this situation:
>
> * Each developer has its own repository
> * Each developer has a branched named the same as their user id
> * Each developer pulls from the other repository of the developers
>
> Then when after I've pulled in the work from developer A to try it out,
> I continue to work on my own branch with more commits. When I want to
> push my changes to my (personal) remote repository it fails because it
> would create multiple heads. I can fix this by giving a revisition to
> push [1], but then I first have to do "hg id" to find the revision.
>
> Is there any way to get hg push to only push changes that are on my
> branch?
>
> [1]: speaking of pushing revision, will it include all missing dependent
> changesets when pushing, or only the one I'm giving as an argument?
>
>
> --
> Trygve
> _______________________________________________
> Mercurial mailing list
> Mercurial at selenic.com
> http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial/attachments/20080328/4126be3d/attachment.htm 


More information about the Mercurial mailing list