All geek questions in one place

Mercurial: concrete examples of problems using hg pull --rebase

I'm struggling to find a mercury workflow that matches the way we work.

I currently prefer a clone for every function, but this is quite a change in thinking moving from Subversion. We will also have problems with the recurring costs that we have when setting up the environments.

Using hg pull --rebase seems to give us more of a workflow similar to Subversion, but from reading around I am afraid to use it.

I think I understand the concepts, and I see that rewriting the story is not ideal, but I cannot come up with any scenarios that I personally find unacceptable.

I would like to know what the "worst" scenarios that hg pull --rebase can create are either theoretical or experience. I need concrete examples, not opinions on whether to rewrite history. Not that I am against people who have an opinion, just that it seems that many of them are expressed on the Internet without many examples to support them;)

+3
source share
2 answers

The first thing to learn about the new Mercurial Converter is the convenience of completing incomplete code. Subversion taught us that you shouldn't break code. Now it's time to wean this habit. Commating often gives you great flexibility in your workflow.

, hg pull --rebase, - - . DVCS , , , . , , ( ), , , , . , DVCS.

( Mercurial ) , . , "" . . , , , .

. -, , , "". -, , , - , . -, , , ​​.

, . , , , . , website-central, website-tghw .. , , . , remotebranches, , hg nudge, .

, , , Mercurial . , . , , Git ( ), , , , , .

, , , Mercurial ( SVN). , , .

+10

Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/1765791/

More articles:


All Articles