newcomer question not found in the FAQ
Hans Meine
meine at informatik.uni-hamburg.de
Tue Dec 22 22:01:30 UTC 2009
On Dienstag 22 Dezember 2009, Martin Geisler wrote:
> Hans Meine <meine at informatik.uni-hamburg.de> writes:
> > I wonder why
> > hg commit --close-branch
> > would not be the first thing to mention / use here.
>
> Because it does not do what you (and I) expect it to do :-)
Right. I should've remembered I made the same mistake in the past.
> Simply adding a changeset made with 'hg commit --close-branch' wont make
> a repository head disappear from the 'hg heads' list. [...]
Right, but note that "hg heads default" may be a common workaround - this will
actually hide the closed heads. It still feels deficient that "hg heads"
displays them.
> The help for 'hg branches' hints that one can get more information about
> closing branches by seeing 'hg commit --close-branch'. However, the help
> for commit does not mention --close-branch...
Ooops.
> > AFAICT, this has the benefit that you can see in the changeset graph
> > what happened, i.e. there is not artificial connection between
> > branches which have not actually been merged.
>
> Indeed, I think that would be nice. I imagine that Mercurial should
> always let you push such "closed heads", even when you thereby create
> multiple heads in the target repository. The condition would then be
> that you don't create multiple open heads.
Did you test this? I'd expect mercurial to do that already.
> When cloning, we should probably update to the tip-most open head on the
> default branch.
Again, that's exactly my expectation.
Have a nice day,
Hans
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.mercurial-scm.org/pipermail/mercurial/attachments/20091222/253d0c31/attachment.asc>
More information about the Mercurial
mailing list