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

List:       mercurial
Subject:    Re: branches, bookmarks, new heads
From:       Uwe Brauer <oub () mat ! ucm ! es>
Date:       2017-01-11 14:13:30
Message-ID: 877f61it11.fsf () mat ! ucm ! es
[Download RAW message or body]


   > On 12/30/2016 07:03 PM, Uwe Brauer wrote:


   > feature1 is now ahead of 2 commits, marking the feature as finished is
   > simple, just move the @ bookmark where feature1 is and just delete the
   > feature1 bookmark.

   > No head, no merge, pure linear based history.

I thought a bit more about the linear history approach. What do you do
with other commits which have been pushed while you are working on
feature?

I presume you run

 hg pull -u --rebase

From time to time?

I find this confusing and feel that it disturbs  my workflow.

That is why I prefer a nonlinear approach, having feature on a named
branch.

Then I run

 hg up default
 hg pull -u

From time to time and when I finish on the feature branch
I merge default onto the feature branch and then push. (I might close
the branch at some point).

Uwe Brauer 

_______________________________________________
Mercurial mailing list
Mercurial@mercurial-scm.org
https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial

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