Welcome to OGeek Q&A Community for programmer and developer-Open, Learning and Share
Welcome To Ask or Share your Answers For Others

Categories

0 votes
522 views
in Technique[技术] by (71.8m points)

mercurial - Why is a --new-branch flag needed?

Isn't this a normal workflow?

[default] $ hg branch foo

[foo] $ [... some commits ...]

[foo] $ hg update default

[default] $ hg merge foo

[default] $ hg commit -m "merged foo"

[default] $ hg push
abort: push creates new remote branches: foo!
(use 'hg push --new-branch' to create new remote branches)

What is the otherwise ideal way to do branching → merging → pushing?

See Question&Answers more detail:os

与恶龙缠斗过久,自身亦成为恶龙;凝视深渊过久,深渊将回以凝视…
Welcome To Ask or Share your Answers For Others

1 Reply

0 votes
by (71.8m points)

The mercurial philosophy is that you should not be pushing things which make it harder for other users of the repository. Relevant to this question is that multiple heads make it harder for other developers, since they would then need to merge your changes. Hence by default pushing new heads is rejected by the server. The -f option was used to allow pushing new heads.

However, the case of pushing a new named branch is quite different conceptually to pushing a new head on the same branch. Many workflows (including mine) do each task on a separate named branch. The --new-branch option allows you to push up a new branch, whilst rejecting new heads on existing branches. It's also different (as you've seen) because it's needed even if the new branch does not create a new head (due to merging).

My personal feeling is that new branches should be allowed by default, but the mercurial developers prefer otherwise.


与恶龙缠斗过久,自身亦成为恶龙;凝视深渊过久,深渊将回以凝视…
OGeek|极客中国-欢迎来到极客的世界,一个免费开放的程序员编程交流平台!开放,进步,分享!让技术改变生活,让极客改变未来! Welcome to OGeek Q&A Community for programmer and developer-Open, Learning and Share
Click Here to Ask a Question

...