[Python-Dev] Mercurial conversion repositories

[Antoine Pitrou]

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 16:06:45 -0500
Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org> wrote:
> 
> >I find bazaar's model confusing, and hg's intuitive, just like Éric.
> >And consider that I learned bazaar before mercurial.  To me, it makes
> >perfect sense that in a DVCS the "unit" is a directory containing
> >a repository and a working copy, and that the repository is *the*
> >repository.  That is, it has everything related to the project in it,
> >just like the master SVN repository does (plus, since it is a DVCS,
> >whatever I've committed locally but not pushed to the master).  To have
> >a repository that only has some of the stuff in it is, IMO, confusing.
> >I advocated for having all the Python history in one repo partly for
> >that reason.
> 
> I would feel better about Mercurial's if the repo where not intimately tied
> with a default working tree (yes, I know -U).  In a sense, that's what
> Bazaar's shared repositories are: a place where all your history goes.  In
> Bazaar's model though, it's not tied to a specific working tree, and it's
> hidden in a dot-directory.

Often (but not always), when you're wanting to do something, there's an
extension for Mercurial which can be enabled ;)
http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/ShareExtension

Regards

Antoine.