New to Hg - best practices?

[Hans Meine]

On Wednesday 05 November 2008 11:11:35 Marcos Scriven wrote:
> 1) I get that I should (could) have one 'in' repo clone, one 'out'
> repo clone, and one or more working clones.

IMHO that's overkill.  Start with one single clone and find out for yourself 
when you need extra ones (e.g. for trying out something in a branch, 
independently of your main development).  I even use cloning much less now 
that I use MQ regularly (e.g. for storing away unfinished local changes).(*)

> 2) I know it's best to get away from having a central repo, but
> presumably one does still need at least one repo to be 'the' repo, or
> master so to speak?

In many cases, you'll have a repo published on some server, and all developers 
with appropriate rights may push their changes there.  (This still allows for 
named branches etc. to have different versions.)

HTH,
  Hans

*: From the recent "git vs. hg" thread, I heard that git has special support 
for managing local changes - I would be interested in that, maybe that would 
be a good hg feature, too (if it's possible using hg's architecture).