LiquidHg via MQ

[Arne Babenhauserheide]

On Tuesday 03 May 2011 23:21:49 Kevin Bullock wrote:
> On 3 May 2011, at 1:08 PM, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
> > How would it kill the simple workflow to require explicit action to
> > destroy changesets not referenced by a bookmark? It’s not like gc is
> > needed in normal operation, as it is for git (because git creates quite
> > much garbage).
> 
> Ah, well, see, "garbage collection" implies _automatic_ action to remove
> "unused" data. I'm agreeing with you, that replicating git's misfeature
> would be a bad idea. It would at worst require everyone to use bookmarks.

It could be even worse and create angry requests from users who expected the 
safe behaviour of hg and suddenly lost a pile of work, because they just 
repositioned a bookmark.

It’s about keeping the implicit promises of normal hg operation when you 
switch to working with liquids. If that can be achieved, people can seamlessly 
switch up to using liquid when they need it (without having to relearn a bunch 
of things).

> Sure thing :) I'm pleased with how the concept is shaping up; I'm getting
> more and more eager to see some code that I can play with :)

Same for me! 

- Arne
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 316 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.mercurial-scm.org/pipermail/mercurial/attachments/20110504/e7652770/attachment.asc>