Use of named branches

[Mark A. Flacy]

On 2007.05.05 13:55, Nicholas Cole wrote:
> I've been trying to follow this discussion, and I really can't see
> what's going on...

The folks using named branches believe that "named branches" provides  
the exact semantics and results that you would get from having cloned  
repositories as branches.

That's a reasonable assumption to make, but I don't believe the current  
Mercurial implementation will handle it.  Since the "merge" command is  
currently designed (AFAICT) to reduce the number of heads in the  
repository to 1, I don't see how the named branch model *would* be able  
to work without a lot of care from the end user.