a "patch tree" instead of a patch queue?
Giorgos Keramidas
keramida at ceid.upatras.gr
Wed May 28 18:38:36 UTC 2008
On Wed, 28 May 2008 22:15:35 +0900, Dan <dan at dandrake.org> wrote:
> Looking through the list archives (why didn't I do that before?) I see
> that this concept comes up rather frequently. The "Managing
> independent queues" thread from last month mentioned multiple patch
> queues, which is basically what I was thinking. But having multiple
> heads might work just as well for my needs.
>
> Thanks for your help!
Or having multiple 'clones'. You can have as many clones as needed,
i.e. a 'base' clone at:
~/papers/foo/base
and then task-specific clones at:
~/papers/foo/arxiv
~/papers/foo/journal1
~/papers/foo/journal2
Once you set up the clones, you can commit 'task specific' changes to
the task branch/clone itself and common stuff in the 'base' clone. Then
you can pull & merge the base changes into as many clones as needed.
More information about the Mercurial
mailing list