eol with hg 1.4.x?

[Brett Cannon]

On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 14:18, Matt Mackall <mpm at selenic.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 14:12 -0800, Brett Cannon wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 13:29, Dirkjan Ochtman <dirkjan at ochtman.nl>
> > wrote:
> >         On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 22:22, Martin Geisler
> >         <mg at lazybytes.net> wrote:
> >         >> We're going live with Mercurial 1.4.x in 10 days... am I
> >         better off
> >         >> sticking with win32text for now, and switching to eol in
> >         the future?
> >         >
> >         > I think so -- the eol extension is neither here nor
> >         there :-( I don't
> >         > have a very clear image of what is still missing.
> >         >
> >         > It would be very helpful if you could try out the current
> >         code and help
> >         > hack on it. I'll be busy writing my dissertation in the next
> >         two months
> >         > so I cannot (should not) spend a lot of time on it :-(
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Once I am done with my PyCon presentation prep (which might not be
> > until PyCon =) this is my top open source priority.
> >
> >
> >         I have one particularly sticky bug in hgsubversion to fix,
> >         when I
> >         manage to get that done (I've only been hacking on it for a
> >         few
> >         months...) I want to put out an updated python hg conversion
> >         along
> >         with the eol extension and see what the Python guys think.
> >         That might
> >         solicit some useful feedback...
> >
> >
> > If Martin thinks the extension is feature-complete (at least in the
> > spec), I say we make sure the extension is rock-solid and then Python
> > makes the switch regardless of what others want in terms of new
> > features. The people who brought up this issue have had quite a while
> > to follow the work and be active participants. I am quite comfortable
> > with saying that people have until the release of Mercurial 1.5 on
> > July 1 (since the extension depends on that version) to get any
> > changes in, but that will be the date Python hits the switch.
> > Otherwise we make the switch much sooner (shortly after Mercurial 1.4
> > is out?) and say if people want/need to use the extension they need to
> > run Mercurial from a specific branch.
>
> You're a revision behind. 1.4 was Nov 1, 1.5 will be Mar 1, and 1.6 will
> be Jul 1.


Ugh, turning into one of those days. Sorry about that.


> I don't know what the state of the eol extension is, but it's
> acceptable to add completely new extensions to dot releases, so if it's
> ready, it can go into 1.4.3 on Feb 1.
>

Then IMO Python can switch as soon as the extension is solid and Dirkjan is
ready to flip the switch, but that can be discussed off-list.

-Brett
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial/attachments/20100105/1389e35b/attachment.htm>