Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals
  1. PO
    text
    copied!<p>Here at Fog Creek, we use a similar workflow, with one major difference. Because there aren't really lightweight branches in Mercurial (named branches keep their name, even after being merged) we tend to use multiple repositories for our branches. I've found that this makes it easier to know which branch you're working on, and also makes it harder to accidentally merge between branches, since each of your branches could have ad-hoc branches of its own.</p> <p>Instead, we have Stable, QA, and Devel repos that we work with. Feature work goes into Devel and merges up to QA and Stable, while bug fixes go into Stable and QA, and are merged back into Devel.</p> <p>A lot of our devs also keep their own branch repos for longer running projects, or anything that they're working on that might break someone else's code.</p> <p>Some of our devs have each branch in a different directory, so they are explicitly switching from one to another. Others prefer to pull all three into one repo, using the <a href="https://bitbucket.org/tghw/hg-remotebranches" rel="noreferrer">remote-branches</a> extension to manage the various heads.</p> <p>This did give us a bit of trouble when we were using the basic <code>hg serve</code> to host our repos, since creating a new devel repo or renaming repos required a sysadmin. That's part of why we made it so anyone can create branch repos in <a href="http://kilnhg.com/" rel="noreferrer">Kiln</a>.</p> <p>It would be nice if Mercurial had a better branching model, and there is some work going on to help with that, but this is what works for us.</p>
 

Querying!

 
Guidance

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload