Forest Extension - Not to be found?
Dr Andrew John Hughes
ahughes at redhat.com
Tue Jul 26 02:35:02 UTC 2011
On 22:17 Mon 25 Jul , Mario Torre wrote:
> Il giorno lun, 25/07/2011 alle 12.55 -0700, Kelly O'Hair ha scritto:
> > On Jul 25, 2011, at 10:45 AM, mark.reinhold at oracle.com wrote:
> > > 2011/7/25 10:06 -0700, kelly.ohair at oracle.com:
> > >> On Jul 25, 2011, at 10:03 AM, Mario Torre wrote:
> > >>> I would also like to amend the README files, so that every reference
> > >>> to the forest disappears, what do you think?
> > >>
> > >> I thought that was already done.
> > >
> > > I don't understand why people are so eager to wipe out all references
> > > to the forest extension.
> > >
> > > It's a bit clunky, I agree, and the original author doesn't maintain
> > > it any more, but one Michael Tharp is maintaining a fork here:
> > >
> > > https://bitbucket.org/gxti/hgforest
> > >
> > > I use this on a daily basis and it works fine. Until and unless we
> > > replace the forest extension with something better than a shell script
> > > I suggest we refer people to this version as a viable alternative.
> > It broke with 1.8 and is broken again with 1.9. Each breakage creates pains
> > for multiple people and it is just a pain in my view.
> > Hopefully we will have a better alternative than a shell script soon, and when
> > that happens I'll re-adjust the Dev Guide to use that extension, although I do think
> > the Dev Guide spent too much time talking about forests than it should have.
> > Most developers work in one repository, and I think the guide should try and focus on that.
> > -kto
> Honestly, to Kelly's point, I would say that forest should not be a
> mandatory feature, and although the script is less nice that the forest
> extension, the fact that this breaks from time to time is indeed
> irritating, especially since mercurial is released quite often, and we
> only maintain it for some very specific version of hg (usually the
> latest, as this is what we get from the Linux distributions we Free
> Software hippies tend to use), so we leave out all the other people that
> for one reason or another don't updated.
> I still think we should support forests, but not to the point to make
> them mandatory and spend so much words in the documentation, especially
> (and this was the point of the original post), since our links are
> outdated. Well, that's just my point of view, that is :)
Not only does it break regularly as it's not part of the upstream Mercurial project,
but the forest extension is slow. I moved away from it in preference of my own shell
scripts while it still worked and to no apparent disadvantage. Exactly what is the
benefit of it?
Free Java Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)
Support Free Java!
Contribute to GNU Classpath and IcedTea
PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/)
Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D 0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37
More information about the discuss