3 ms·

Yet you're complaining about that option and saying that it doesn't support the branching model as git. It does support it, but you rejected it.

ciupicri 16y ago
Here's my current setup: I have 2 clones/repositories of Satchmo. [1] is for bug fixing and [2] for translations. I've asked for a better solution on the #mercurial channel and no one has offered it to me. If you have a better idea that's similar to git[3] (1 repo), I'm waiting for it. Until then I'll complain about what Mercurial is offering me, just like Groxx and cdavid (see above). [1] http://bitbucket.org/ciupicri/satchmo http://bitbucket.org/ciupicri/satchmo [2] http://bitbucket.org/ciupicri/satchmo-l10n-ro http://bitbucket.org/ciupicri/satchmo-l10n-ro [3] http://github.com/ciupicri/cobbler/tree/master-pagination-bugfix http://github.com/ciupicri/cobbler/tree/master-pagination-bu...
- tednaleid 16y ago
  Maybe I'm missing some nuance in what you're asking for, but in mercurial, you should be able to just create a named branch to get the same effect: hg branch bug-fixes hg commit -m "creating bug fix branch" hg update default hg branch translations hg commit -m "creating translations branch" then you can just "hg update <branchname>" to do an in place switching between branches (just like git checkout). I wouldn't use 2 separate repositories for that, just one. We've got multiple named branches at work (I also use bookmarks with development branches fairly heavily, but that's a slightly different topic).
  - ciupicri 16y ago
    Wouldn't these branches be permanent? They might be fine for translations, but I doubt upstream would accept one for a bug fix. As for bookmarks, if I understand this correctly, I have to convince upstream to use them. With git I can create a branch in my repository and upstream can pull my changes in whatever branch it wishes too. I don't need to convince anyone to do anything else, besides accepting my patches.
    - tednaleid 16y ago
      Sorry, I misunderstood your use case for the bug-fix branch. Yes, you likely wouldn't want a named branch for that. I use local bookmarks for this. It lets you think of it as a branch locally (it's really a floating tag), but doesn't (automatically) get pushed out.

ciupicri 16y ago

Here's my current setup: I have 2 clones/repositories of Satchmo. [1] is for bug fixing and [2] for translations. I've asked for a better solution on the #mercurial channel and no one has offered it to me. If you have a better idea that's similar to git[3] (1 repo), I'm waiting for it. Until then I'll complain about what Mercurial is offering me, just like Groxx and cdavid (see above). [1] http://bitbucket.org/ciupicri/satchmo http://bitbucket.org/ciupicri/satchmo [2] http://bitbucket.org/ciupicri/satchmo-l10n-ro http://bitbucket.org/ciupicri/satchmo-l10n-ro [3] http://github.com/ciupicri/cobbler/tree/master-pagination-bugfix http://github.com/ciupicri/cobbler/tree/master-pagination-bu...

tednaleid 16y ago
Maybe I'm missing some nuance in what you're asking for, but in mercurial, you should be able to just create a named branch to get the same effect: hg branch bug-fixes hg commit -m "creating bug fix branch" hg update default hg branch translations hg commit -m "creating translations branch" then you can just "hg update <branchname>" to do an in place switching between branches (just like git checkout). I wouldn't use 2 separate repositories for that, just one. We've got multiple named branches at work (I also use bookmarks with development branches fairly heavily, but that's a slightly different topic).
- ciupicri 16y ago
  Wouldn't these branches be permanent? They might be fine for translations, but I doubt upstream would accept one for a bug fix. As for bookmarks, if I understand this correctly, I have to convince upstream to use them. With git I can create a branch in my repository and upstream can pull my changes in whatever branch it wishes too. I don't need to convince anyone to do anything else, besides accepting my patches.
  - tednaleid 16y ago
    Sorry, I misunderstood your use case for the bug-fix branch. Yes, you likely wouldn't want a named branch for that. I use local bookmarks for this. It lets you think of it as a branch locally (it's really a floating tag), but doesn't (automatically) get pushed out.