Forest Extension - Not to be found?
neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com
Tue Jul 26 16:18:48 UTC 2011
2011/7/26 Mohan Pakkurti <mohan.pakkurti at oracle.com>:
>> 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?
> There is no benefit. No one has gotten around to owning and supporting a proper replacement for the forest extension and we need that functionality because of the way the repositories are organized and relate to each other.
> Alternatives to the forest extension (subrepos) have been discussed and they usually end up in heated exchanges.
> We could gain a lot by revisiting the design of our repositories and workflows so that we can continue to work as we do today and in addition allow elementary operations, like tracking changes to the entire collection of repositories.
> I would support such an effort, instead of periodically having to address issues caused by using a deprecated feature in the source control system.
Yeah, I understand this is handy, but I started to not rely on it
since forest got deprecated the first time.
Some of our developers started to complain because they lost the
forest, they were the same that complained before we introduced the
forest ;) so you can never make everybody happy!
But to be honest, I think Kelly's script is quite good for almost
everything you want to do on the forest, and I agree most of the time
you end up working on a "simple" sub project, not the whole forest
pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF
Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF
Proud GNU Classpath developer: http://www.classpath.org/
Read About us at: http://planet.classpath.org
Please, support open standards:
More information about the discuss