Process workflow--pulling remote repos

[Matt Mackall]

On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 06:29:29PM -0400, Kevin Smith wrote:
> >Second, don't hesitate to use multiple trees locally. Mercurial makes
> >this fast and light-weight. Typical usage is to have an incoming tree,
> >an outgoing tree, and a separate tree for each area being worked on.
> 
> I guess one of my questions is whether you (as the maintainer of perhaps 
> the largest and/or most active project being managed by mercurial) 
> actually tend to use multiple working trees on a regular basis. Do you 
> tend to use several working trees each day? Or perhaps one every week or 
> so to do exploratory development on some new concept?

Depends. Some times I'll have a lot of scratch trees, other times I'll
do a lot of work in one tree.
 
> What if you are the upstream also? Like for you, do you just have an 
> "incoming" tree that's identical to your outgoing tree? Or do you skip 
> the incoming tree for your work?

I have incoming trees for the various people I pull from.

> 
> I assume that you keep all incoming contributions completely separate 
> from work you're doing yourself? That is, you would either pull your own 
> changes from working to outgoing, OR you would pull someone else's 
> changes into outgoing. Or do you sometimes pull someone else's changes 
> into a working repo where you are actively doing your own work?

My primary tree is a "merge tree". I do various small work here, but
mostly patch merging. Not many people are exporting trees to me at the
moment, so I'm not doing many pulls.
 
-- 
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.