Use of named branches

[Mark A. Flacy]

On 2007.05.05 02:06, Sebastien Lucas wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> First some background, I have happily used Subversion for 2 years at
> work and I think I learned how to use it right. I'm currently
> reviewing mercurial for my personal needs. I'm using 0.9.3 on debian.
> 
> Coming from subversion, I'm used to have a trunk (where the main
> developpement take place) and my branches in the same repository. I
> know that's the prefered way is to use hg clone to create a branch but
> I'd prefer to use named branches to keep everything (trunk and dev
> branches) in the same repository.
> 
> I made some experiment last night :
> 
> hg init test1
> cd test1
> hg branch trunk -> my first commit will be in a branch named trunk (SVN habit)
> touch a.txt
> hg add a.txt
> hg ci
> 
> I now have a revision 0 on branch trunk with a.txt
> 
> hg branch seb-dev
> touch b.txt
> hg add b.txt
> hg ci
> 
> I have revision 1 on branch seb-dev with a.txt and b.txt
> 
> hg up -C trunk
> touch c.txt
> hg add c.txt
> hg ci
> 
> Revision 2 on branch trunk with a.txt and c.txt
> 
> hg merge seb-dev
> hg ci
> 
> Revision 3 on branch trunk with a, b, c
> 
> So everything's allright with this sample.
> 
> Now I'll take a easier one (at least I thought it was) :
> 
> hg init test2
> cd test2
> hg branch trunk
> touch a.txt
> hg add a.txt
> hg ci
> 
> I now have a revision 0 on branch trunk with a.txt
> 
> hg branch seb-dev
> touch b.txt
> hg add b.txt
> hg ci
> 
> I have revision 1 on branch seb-dev with a.txt and b.txt. till now
> everything's ok
> 
> hg up -C trunk
> hg merge seb-dev
> 
> I have the message :
> abort: there is nothing to merge, just use 'hg update' or look at 'hg heads'
> 
> if I run hg heads, I only got one head.
> 
> I really feel I have missed something (or everything). Can anybody
> enlight me on a proper use of named branches ?


[dryly] Now you know why cloned repositories are the preferred method to create branches.