On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 14:24:40 -0500, Olemis Lang <[email protected]> wrote :
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 5:31 AM, Saint Germain <[email protected]> > wrote: [...] > > > > > > > Sorry that doesn't really answer the question but if you want > > > source > > control > > > for your patches, github might be a better bet for this reason. > > > > No problem, hg-git is working perfectly for me and I can directly > > pull the changes from github. > > > > JFTR , these are the repositories I use : > > - https://bitbucket.org/olemis/bloodhound-tlp > * created with hgsubversion , contains changesets after project > graduation (... due to a bug ...) > - https://bitbucket.org/olemis/bloodhound-mq > * a patch queue based on the former > - https://bitbucket.org/olemis/bloodhound_hggit > * an hg mirror of Github mirror ... > * ... thus containing full project history (incubator + tlp) > > Soon I'll automate the process to keep them synchronized > Hi ! Will bloodhound-mq contains only the patches or also the trunk ? I don't see the difference between bloodhound-tlp qnd bloodhound_hggit/ if they are synchronized, shouldn't they be the same ? If not which one should I use to apply the patches ? Is there a reason why you managed all the patches in a different branch ? I haven't seen this approach recommended when I was looking at MQ tutorial. Sorry for all these questions. You seem to have a nice workflow, so I am trying to copy it ! ;-) Thanks
