"Patch Management" descriptions in conflict

[Pietro Moras]

May I therefore conclude that when people say “Patches Management” they usually refer to the export / import Mercurial commands, not to the more advanced MQ – Mercurial Queues tool? Thanks. - P.M.
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 13:07:56 +0100
Subject: Re: "Patch Management" descriptions in conflict
From: g.gherdovich at gmail.com
To: studio-pm at hotmail.com
CC: mercurial at selenic.com

Pietro Moras wrote:
::::
:::: On “Mercurial – The definitive Guide” (by B. O'Sullivan) the “Patch Management”
:::: is described in terms of MQ – Mercurial Queues.
:::: Elsewhere in completely different terms, of: 

:::: “export” and “import” of *.patch or *.diff files. I'm confused.
:::: Your thoughts? Thanks.

you can think of `hg import` and `hg export` as "low level" commands;
they only implement the translation (changeset <---> diff file).


MQ on the other hand provides you a structured way to manage
a stack of patches: to begin with, MQ gives an order to them.
With `hg qpop` and `hg qpush` you don't have to think "what's the next patch",

you just handle them as a stack.

Also you can jump from a stack to another, handling parallel flows of development.
Everything is orthogonal to changesets, changeset are written in stone
while patches are floating around... You know it all, it's in the book

by B. O'Sullyvan.

Think of MQ as import+export on steroids.

By Bryan's own admission, the relevance of MQ in the book is overrated
with respect to the current state of things.
I remember him saying on IRC "If I had to write the book today,

MQ would have had an appendix, not two chapters".
If the topic interests you, make sure you check http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/ChangesetEvolution

which implements history rewriting as a tracked (versioned) and shareable operation.

GGhh

 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mercurial-scm.org/pipermail/mercurial/attachments/20140129/1f762fe4/attachment-0002.html>