4 ms·

I work in several branches in the same file system directory. Branching in mercurial is as simple as "hg branch branchname", and switching branches is just "hg

I work in several branches in the same file system directory. Branching in mercurial is as simple as "hg branch branchname", and switching branches is just "hg update branchname". As long as you make sure you commit everything you can easily work in one directory. Merging changes across branches is easy too, as you only need to specify the revision number.

ahomescu1 13y ago
If you push while having open local branches, they get pushed to the remote (or at least that's how it was last time I used them). That's not what you want, in most cases (git branches are local).
- rbehrends 13y ago
  Mercurial won't push new branches unless you specify -f or --new-branch. You can selectively push only the branches you want with hg push -r branch_or_revision (hg push -r . for the current revision). You can also hide branches using phases, so they won't be pushed even with -f or --new-branch.
  - ahomescu1 13y ago
    The guide from [1] confirms it works the way I saw it (it pushes all branches): Mercurial will push/pull all branches by default, while git will push/pull only the current branch. Did this behavior change in recent versions of hg? 1 - http://stevelosh.com/blog/2009/08/a-guide-to-branching-in-mercurial/ http://stevelosh.com/blog/2009/08/a-guide-to-branching-in-me...
    - rbehrends 13y ago
      Mercurial will attempt to push all branches. It will then immediately stop with an error message unless you specify -f or --new-branch if you're trying to push a branch that does not already exist in the remote repository (or even to create a new head in an existing branch). In order to get rid of the error message you need to either (1) explicitly tell Mercurial to push all branches, (2) specify which existing branch(es)/revision(s) you want to push (they must already exist remotely), or (3) hide the branch with hg phase secret -f. This means that your local branches will not leak into the remote repository unless you specifically instruct Mercurial to do so. Of these, only the phase approach is new (2.1+). The rest hasn't changed.

ahomescu1 13y ago

If you push while having open local branches, they get pushed to the remote (or at least that's how it was last time I used them). That's not what you want, in most cases (git branches are local).

rbehrends 13y ago
Mercurial won't push new branches unless you specify -f or --new-branch. You can selectively push only the branches you want with hg push -r branch_or_revision (hg push -r . for the current revision). You can also hide branches using phases, so they won't be pushed even with -f or --new-branch.
- ahomescu1 13y ago
  The guide from [1] confirms it works the way I saw it (it pushes all branches): Mercurial will push/pull all branches by default, while git will push/pull only the current branch. Did this behavior change in recent versions of hg? 1 - http://stevelosh.com/blog/2009/08/a-guide-to-branching-in-mercurial/ http://stevelosh.com/blog/2009/08/a-guide-to-branching-in-me...
  - rbehrends 13y ago
    Mercurial will attempt to push all branches. It will then immediately stop with an error message unless you specify -f or --new-branch if you're trying to push a branch that does not already exist in the remote repository (or even to create a new head in an existing branch). In order to get rid of the error message you need to either (1) explicitly tell Mercurial to push all branches, (2) specify which existing branch(es)/revision(s) you want to push (they must already exist remotely), or (3) hide the branch with hg phase secret -f. This means that your local branches will not leak into the remote repository unless you specifically instruct Mercurial to do so. Of these, only the phase approach is new (2.1+). The rest hasn't changed.