Which mercurial versions are worth testing against

[Gregory Szorc]

On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 11:31 PM, Rebecca Cran <rebecca at bluestop.org> wrote:

> On 1/7/2017 4:36 PM, Augie Fackler wrote:
>
>> Ubuntu LTS is a proxy for “the oldest hg users are likely to be running
>> in practice” for me - and so far it’s worked remarkably well. You might
>> also use something like debian stale as a proxy for that. So far, I’ve
>> gotten relatively few complaints about supported versions of Mercurial.
>>
>
> Depending on who your users are, they may also be using RHEL?  When I last
> used it a few years ago, it had some _really_ old versions of packages in
> it - I think going back to even around 5+ years earlier.
>

Yeah - RHEL 6 uses Mercurial 1.4 and RHEL 7 uses 2.6. Even though 2.6 is
"only" 3.5 years old, a lot has happened in that time, especially around
performance and robustness. I think your time would be better spent
upgrading these users to a modern release than making extensions compatible
with them. FWIW, you can `make docker-centos6` and `make docker-centos7`
from a Mercurial source tree to build RPMs for these distros.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mercurial-scm.org/pipermail/mercurial/attachments/20170108/f1f08494/attachment-0002.html>