MQ use-case (Up/down grades)

BOGGESS Rod TENOVA INC Rod.Boggess at tenova.com
Mon Oct 16 20:26:28 UTC 2017


I'm sure Evolve can do it through rebasing, but each time it does this, it adds a piece of genuinely garbage history behind (invisible to the client but not the computer or drive), and I'm wondering, of the two evils, I’m thinking MQ is the lesser, not so?

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 21:27:11 +0200
From: Aurélien Campéas <aurelien.campeas at pythonian.fr>
To: evolve-testers at mercurial-scm.org
Subject: Re: MQ use-case (Up/down grades)
Message-ID: <e4c0257a-04ad-72be-1ad0-1f9020cb4028 at pythonian.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed

Hi,

I think Pierre-Yves will be the most qualified to warn against any issue with evolve/mq co-existence.

Just my 2 cents: your special use-case could probably be also handled with evolve, granted you keep that special branch/patch in draft mode forever (and rebase it at will wherever you need). But your workflow is not completely clear to me.

Regards,
Aurélien.




Tenova: Innovative Solutions for Metals and Mining
Visit our website at www.tenova.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
Confidentiality Notice : This message, together with its attachments, contains strictly confidential information and is intended only for the addressee identified above,who is the sole party authorized to use
 and copy it and, assuming any related liability , to forward it to others. Anyone receiving this message by mistake or reading it without authorization is hereby notified that storage, reproduction, disclosure or distribution of the message to persons other than the addressee is strictly forbidden. They are asked to return the message immediately to the sender and to erase the original message received.
Thank you.

Le 16/10/2017 à 17:39, BOGGESS Rod   TENOVA INC a écrit :
> I’m looking to switch to Evolve from MQ, and in most cases, it appears
> (from documentation) to do a better job. So I’m enabling it to test
> and learn before I advocate it to the rest of the group. Mostly, I
> wanted to know if there were any interactions or problems in using
> both together on the same repo. That said, there’s a use-case were I’m
> having trouble imagining that Evolve works better than MQ.
>
> There are several applications we use, for example, Visual Studio and
> Kepware, where it’s possible to have two developers working with
> different versions than the deployment versions. So, let’s say that
> the original software was deployed with Visual Studio 2005. A customer
> calls up for us to troubleshoot a problem, and we’ve upgraded to 2008
> or 2010 (a few of us even have 2015). We can’t go back and buy 2005
> even if we wanted to because it’s MS policy to pull old copies from
> the shelves when they release upgrades. The code is basically the
> same, but the build (MS Build) works a bit differently and uses different files.
>
> We upgrade the project, then store the modifications for the upgrade
> in a patch. You work your changes, swap the order of the patches, then
> finalize only the programmatic changes. The customer will have the
> original Visual Studio version and we do the last build on the remote
> machine, though there has only ever been one case where the C# code
> didn’t build (an new keyword was added that the older version didn’t
> support, and correcting it was a ‘Duh’ moment, easily fixed and forgotten).
>
> Because of this, I don’t really see us ever fully abandoning MQ
> patches, but for managing standard rewrites, using Evolve would be an
> improvement, so I’d be interested in knowing if there are known
> problems running both (or if there’s a good reason to use evolve even
> for this weird use-case).
>
>
>
> Tenova: Innovative Solutions for Metals and Mining
> <http://www.tenova.com>
> *Tenova: Innovative Solutions for Metals and Mining *Visit our website
> at: www.tenova.com
>


------------------------------



More information about the Evolve-testers mailing list