Mercurial 2.0 call for testing

[Josh Malinski]

Not to hijack the thread but....

What order do you recommend upgrading clients and servers? Currently I
have been running under upgrade the client make sure it works/fixes/does
what it needs, then upgrade the server after I have a golden client.
This has bitten me in the ass only recently when I fell behind on the
server upgrades and I was trying to use functionality in the new client
that the server didn't know about. I was trying to stay within a minor
version of each other unless I needed a fix.


--Josh

-----Original Message-----
From: mercurial-bounces at selenic.com
[mailto:mercurial-bounces at selenic.com] On Behalf Of Matt Mackall
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 1:45 PM
To: Scott Palmer
Cc: 'mercurial'
Subject: Re: Mercurial 2.0 call for testing

On Mon, 2011-10-17 at 16:22 -0400, Scott Palmer wrote:
> On 2011-10-17, at 12:33 PM, Matt Mackall wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 2011-10-17 at 12:01 +0200, Lionel wrote:
> >> Hello All,
> >> 
> >> v2.0RC doesn't work here, still because of issue 2582. Any chance 
> >> of having that issue solved for 2.0 (or even in a near future)? 
> >> We're stuck to v1.8.4 because of it.
> > 
> > I don't really understand what's affected. Does this break Steve's 
> > TortoiseHG builds?
> 
> It makes the binaries for Windows unusable via mod_wsgi on Apache for 
> one.

I see. You're aware that it's perfectly fine to use any clients 1.0 -
2.0 with any server 1.0 - 2.0, right? Unless you need a very recent
feature like the faster discovery protocol, you probably won't notice
anything change from upgrading your server.

In fact, I would actually recommend against upgrading clients and
servers at the same time. If you do and something breaks, you won't know
which side broke.

>   The C runtime libraries won't load in that scenario due to issues 
> with how the Mercurial binaries are built.  I wish I was expert enough

> in the matter to assist, but all I know is that it likely means that 
> the appropriate "manifest" is not embedded in the native bits of the 
> Windows binaries for Mercurial.

Compiling your own Mercurial for your server should not be prohibitively
hard, provided you've got an appropriate compiler somewhere.

--
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.


_______________________________________________
Mercurial mailing list
Mercurial at selenic.com
http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial