Associating bugs with changesets

[Arne Babenhauserheide]

On Tuesday, 2. June 2009 14:36:42 Greg Ward wrote:
> * we're planning a multi-repository workflow, with all changes
> eventually landing in a master repository.  Corrections would take
> some time to propagate to all repositories, so different people will
> have different changeset/bug mappings at different times.

Would that be a problem? 
Who does QA corrections? 
How does the correcting interleave with the general workflow? 

> * some of the difficulties with .hgtags would reappear: specifically,
> I'd either have to iterate over all heads to assemble the canonical
> set of corrections, or only allow corrections on default (and even
> then there's still the possibility of multiple heads).

Since QA-corrections aren't as visible in history as tags, and they don't need 
to be related in any way to the corrected changeset, allowing them only on 
default sounds good to me. 

Best wishes, 
Arne

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 
   - singing a part of the history of free software -
              http://infinite-hands.draketo.de
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial/attachments/20090602/1300a8ea/attachment.pgp