Mercurial Workflow: Feature seperation via named branches

[Pierre-Yves David]

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 03:17:36PM -0500, Benjamin Fritz wrote:

> Yes, this is the case. It is somewhat strange (especially in the
> open-source world) but it is what it is. Bram is the
> benevolent-dictator-for-life of Vim and still maintains it by
> accepting patch files from Vim community (in pretty much any format
> but normally in Mercurial's nowadays) and then releasing each coherent
> change as a patch which he also happens to apply and keep in
> Mercurial. The nice thing is that within Vim's internal scripting
> language you can check for not only a specific version but also a very
> specific "patch level" using something like "v:version == 703 &&
> has('patch219')" for the specific changeset you quote. Due to this
> release strategy, it's convenient to be able to refer to specific
> changesets by version ID. But since there are not a bunch of
> intermediate changesets, tagging each one still only results in a few
> hundred tags per major version, rather that the hundreds of thousands
> you indicated would cause a problem.

You might consider using and extension digging into a revision content to
*generate* this "patch-version" number instead of tagging every single
changetset.

-- 
Pierre-Yves David

http://www.logilab.fr/


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial/attachments/20110616/1179a080/attachment.pgp>