[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       mercurial
Subject:    Re: pull everything but one changeset
From:       Kevin Bullock <kbullock+mercurial () ringworld ! org>
Date:       2011-07-19 14:54:41
Message-ID: CA3DEFA8-46D4-478B-85E6-D6B2FF4039B9 () ringworld ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

On Jul 19, 2011, at 6:13 AM, Aekold Helbrass wrote:

> Good day All!
> 
> Tell me please, is there a possibility to pull all changes but without
> one revision?
> Workflow of my stubborn team is based on svn and looks like this:
> 
> 1. trunk is at 1.0
> 2. create a branch as full copy of trunk

$ hg clone trunk branch

> 3. change maven version in branch to 1.0.1.
> 4. change maven version in trunk to 1.1.

At this point, I would:

$ cd trunk
$ hg pull ../branch
$ hg merge

...choosing the changes with the version number set to 1.1. Then commit and continue. \
(This could be a so-called 'null merge' if the version is the _only_ difference \
between branches at this point.)

> 5. continue development of 1.0.1
> 6. continue development of 1.1
> 7. no changes from trunk (1.1) will be backported to 1.0.1, but all
> changes from 1.0.1 must be backported to 1.1.

Okay, that's technically _not_ a backport then, it's a forward-port, which is good. \
Given this, you can merge early and often from 1.0.1 into trunk. The 3-way merge \
logic will "do the right thing" as much as mechanically possible, giving you a much \
smaller set of conflicts to manually resolve. The more often you can merge, the fewer \
conflicts you'll have to deal with at a time, although finding the right frequency \
for merges highly depends on the nature of the project.

Your pattern is frightfully close to \
<http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/StandardBranching>.

pacem in terris / mir / shanti / salaam / heiwa
Kevin R. Bullock

> Currently that
> backporting is done 1960th way - copy changed files back and then
> resolve any possible conflicts.
> 
> I want to move this workflow to mercurial, I think it suits perfectly,
> but that single commit from point 3 is a problem. Any ideas,
> suggestions or links are appreciated.
> _______________________________________________
> Mercurial mailing list
> Mercurial@selenic.com
> http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial

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


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]