Nick Coghlan writes:
Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Note that Bazaar is currently discussing some similar policies. I think the name they have settled on is ".bzrrules". Maybe .hgrules is a better name.
So it would be .hgrules/<extensionname>? With the extension then defining the contents of the rule file?
Yes.
An alternative would be to go one level deeper and have:
.hgrules/required/<extensionname> .hgrules/optional/<extensionname>
I thought briefly about that kind of thing. However, this way would require deciding the semantics of the subdirectories, and while "optional" vs "required" is pretty appealing, how about "required" vs. "requisite"? (As Dave Barry would say, "I am *still* not kidding." See: http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/libs/pam/Linux-PAM-html/sag-configuration-fi... Of course anything related to Python would do a better job of naming<wink>, but such semantic fine points might very well be important. And yes, there are people who take their VCS as seriously as they take authenticating as root.) So what I thought was that extensions would provide a policy function, which would make such judgments when called. But then I realized I had no clue what the semantics should be, so I didn't mention it.