Re: hggroup available in graphics archive

[Michael Goffioul]

On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 9:17 AM, Thomas Weber
<address@hidden> wrote:
>  > Recently, I tried to use MQ locally. This revealed very handy to work
>  > on a single patch incrementally, even on multiple development
>  > setup (I use 2 computers for development): I just had to copy the
>  > patch between the 2 computers and play with qpop/qpush. In the
>  > end, I commited a larger, but more atomic, changeset to the
>  > archive. However, I'm not sure how to deal with that in the context
>  > of a shared public archive.
>
>  I'd say you shouldn't. Keep your patches small, so individual changes
>  can be pulled. But don't throw away most of the machinery your VCS
>  offers you, especially when collaborating with others.

If I understand correctly, going with the MQ way while still keeping the
possibility to share an archive and make it public would mean the
following:
1) the graphics archive would be a clone (at some point in time) of the
main octave archive, along with a set of patches that are under
revision (the patches are unapplied to the graphics archive)
2) we never commit the patches ourself to the archive (hg qdelete -r), but
we wait for the patch inclusion in the main archive, then synchronize the
graphics archive, then "hg qdelete"
3) people wanting to access the graphics code would have to grab the
graphics archive and "hg qpush -a" to apply the patches, then compile

Am I right?

Michael.