-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Am 07.01.2012 19:35, wrote Remy Blank: > I guess it boils down to choosing between having a linear revision graph > and mutating history, or having a graph that reflects how the work was > actually done, and keeping history intact.
Huh, "mutating history" sounds evil, right? ;-) But it's essential to achieve functionality I use everyday, like hgsubversion. Doing changes and commits offline, pushing to (trac-hacks) SVN later and getting local repo copy "corrected" afterwards to reflect the official repos's state, this is just great. > I prefer the latter. So yes, I guess it's just me :) Sure, all this development work-flow is largely a matter of personal preference, what is most familiar and intuitive to you, ... I don't mind using SVN for the official repo, because it doesn't limit you anymore to use something else locally. Anyway, interesting to listen to different recommendations/suggestions for structuring development work, to make up my mind. Steffen Hoffmann -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk8ImBcACgkQ31DJeiZFuHetIQCgzlWaRf0Dc3gbq5XXkVkCeGCX 1zwAoL9SrkaBzRNNfemQ9adjFfVSke49 =4Hm3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Trac Development" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/trac-dev?hl=en.
