[Python-Dev] Backport troubles with mercurial

R. David Murray rdmurray at bitdance.com
Thu Dec 30 20:16:14 CET 2010

On Fri, 31 Dec 2010 02:54:26 +0900, "Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen at xemacs.org> wrote:
> I don't see why the tracking issue is any different than it would be
> for svn.  If you're actually merging, either a dummy merge (what git

Martin already said most of what I would have in response to your

> For cherypicking, I haven't thought carefully about this, but ISTM
> that "hg export | hg import; merge post-patch /dev/null source" should
> give the traditional conflict markers.  This will require a bit of
> care to get the files to merge right, since there will in general be
> multiple files that fail to patch, but the names can be fished out of
> the .rej file(s).  Getting the source files will also be mildly
> tricky, since they live in a different branch, and aren't available in
> your local repository.  It will also require a bit of care to get the
> commit log etc right.  But I don't think it's that hard, conceptually.
> Of course it's preferable to get this feature in hg itself, but I
> don't think we need to wait for hg/maintain a fork.

The fact that I really haven't a clue what you are talking about here
means that I for one am not likely to be helping develop that tool,
at least not any time soon.  So I hope there are people who understand
this stuff who will make it work for the rest of us.

>  > Well, considering that the transition is "soon", the fact that it
>  > is a SMOP is a concern :)
> Sure, but in this crowd, I wouldn't waste a good worry on this
> particular SMOP.

Talent is one thing, available time, as you pointed out about yourself,
is a different matter.

I'm confident we can make this all work.  The only question is when.

R. David Murray                                      www.bitdance.com

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list