On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 8:13 PM, Paul Moore <p.f.mo...@gmail.com> wrote: > For people in the "clean history" school, I'd recommend looking at mq > for your personal use. But it's definitely an advanced feature of > Mercurial, so it may be better to understand core Mercurial (and at > least temporarily accept that Mercurial is based on the "keep all > history" school of thought, or you'll struggle to match the > assumptions of the documentation to your thinking :-)) before diving > into mq.
I'm seeing if I can get the best of both worlds by having a public sandbox repo where I work on things (which has the full messy history of development on its feature branches), and then just drop them into the main repo as coherent patches. Once I land a patch, I'll close the original feature branch in the sandbox, so merge conflicts won't be an issue. Mercurial makes merging easy enough that I'm happy with the way that approach is working so far. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
