Question about named branches
trygvis at inamo.no
Fri Mar 28 05:27:21 CDT 2008
Ian Lewis skrev:
> Ok, I feel your pain. I used to use named branches for that reason too.
> But I gave up using them given the lack of support for them in all the
> tools. hgtk (hg view) will show the branches but not the names. hg web
> will show them but the changelogs are a merged view of all changes
> regardless of which named branch they were in. I had enough of a hard
> time keeping track of what changes were made in what branch and when
> (including merging into other branches) that I just decided to not use
> them anymore. Now if the change is in the branch, it's there, if not
> it's not.
> Anyway, I suppose that the simple answer is no. There isn't a way to
> selectively push one named branch and not another. Someone better in
> mercurial-foo could maybe help you out better, but the only way I can
> think of, off hand, to send changes selectively is by exporting and
> importing the changesets (using hg export/import).
Yeah, I see. The missing support is a bit of a pain, but I would assume
that it is something that will improve in the future. "fixing" hgweb so
that you can select a branch should be doable.
> 2008/3/28, Trygve Laugstøl <trygvis at inamo.no <mailto:trygvis at inamo.no>>:
> Ian Lewis skrev:
> > 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
> > can be maintained by user name.
> Because I want to easily be able to just update to a different branch to
> get the few files that has changed and not have to stop all the servers,
> open a new workspace in my IDE and restart everything.
> Using named branches make this whole process very easy, in particular
> now that all three developers are experimenting (new technology, new
> application) a lot on each our own different parts of the applications.
> The whole reason for us to try out mercurial was to be able to share
> changes easily without everything having to go on trunk.
> > Ian
> > 2008/3/28, Trygve Laugstøl <trygvis at inamo.no
> <mailto:trygvis at inamo.no> <mailto:trygvis at inamo.no
> <mailto: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
> > 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 , but then I first have to do "hg id" to find the
> > Is there any way to get hg push to only push changes that are
> on my
> > branch?
> > : speaking of pushing revision, will it include all
> missing dependent
> > changesets when pushing, or only the one I'm giving as an
> > --
> > Trygve
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mercurial mailing list
> > Mercurial at selenic.com <mailto:Mercurial at selenic.com>
> <mailto:Mercurial at selenic.com <mailto:Mercurial at selenic.com>>
> > http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial
More information about the Mercurial