Home
Reading
Searching
Subscribe
Sponsors
Statistics
Posting
Contact
Spam
Lists
Links
About
Hosting
Filtering
Features Download
Marketing
Archives
FAQ
Blog
 
Gmane
From: Matt Mackall <mpm <at> selenic.com>
Subject: Re: Experimental implementation of liquid-hg
Newsgroups: gmane.comp.version-control.mercurial.devel
Date: Tuesday 18th January 2011 20:52:58 UTC (over 6 years ago)
On Tue, 2011-01-18 at 20:48 +0100, Martin Geisler wrote:
> Matt Mackall  writes:
> 
> Hi everybody,
> 
> > The whole point of liquid is for people to avoid accidentally
> > modifying or deleting or rebasing publicly-visible changesets.
> 
> I also discussed this with Pierre-Yves and the others at the Zurich
> mini-sprint, but let me bring it up here again: do you think rebasing
> publically-visible changesets is a big problem?

Yes. See 15 zillion rants by Linus about it on LKML.

Rebase is not (yet) a first class command in Mercurial, so we get fewer
misguided users of it than Git, but even in my own work I occasionally
have to stop and think: is everything I'm about to rebase local only or
am I going to end up with a bunch of duplicate csets on the server?

> Maybe it is just because people have been burnt in the past and are now
> very careful with using rebase? If so, then this kind of infrastructure
> makes more sense since it would let people be more bold when rebasing,
> knowing that Mercurial will stop them from being stupid.

Indeed. The idea is that Mercurial should keep track (transparently!) of
what you should and shouldn't be changing.

-- 
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.
 
CD: 3ms