RFC: Revised branching implementation

[Mathieu Clabaut]

On 9/15/06, John D. Mitchell <jdmitchell at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> (A) I agree that this is a hack. :-)
>
> (B) The use of nul is an evil hack.
>
> (C) While backwards compatibility is a factor it would be much better
> to break this once, right now, before v1.0 and fix the format to make
> it more extensible, etc. so we don't have to deal with this again in
> the future.
>
> (D) I believe that it would also be safer, IMHO, to write something
> that would upgrade the files in the old format to the new one rather
> than burdening everything forever with this evil hackery. :-)


I totally agree with that.
Better break  the compatibility now in  favor  of a way to cleanly add
future extensions than use a hack wich will prevent some future improvments.
A data structure versionning field looks like a great idea to me. With a
major/minor shceme, it would allows clients to check if they can handle the
data...

That being said I've no much time (no to say no time) to help you now. :-/

-mathieu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mercurial-scm.org/pipermail/mercurial/attachments/20060915/221046cf/attachment-0002.html>