What's next for pbranch?

[Steve Borho]

On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 1:51 AM, Peter Arrenbrecht
<peter.arrenbrecht at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 5:16 PM, Waldemar <waldemar at beechwoods.com> wrote:
>> I am contemplating using pbranch to deal with staggered release cycle at a
>> large corporation that I am contracting for.  My primary concern is the
>> stability of pbranch and the likelihood of it surviving in the next few
>> years.  Can anyone comment on its chances of making it into the set released
>> along with mercurial?  I could offer some development cycles if it could
>> help in the process.
>
> Well, I guess this is the kind of lobbying it's going to take. So far,
> the Mercurial crew has not shown any interest in accepting pbranch
> into hg/ext, despite an offer to convert its doctests into hg-style
> tests.
>
> I am still practically the only one hacking it, but I do not plan on
> dropping it anytime soon. My next task is augmenting conflict
> resolution for the octopus pmerges, and then pfinish as proposed by
> Jesse. Speaking of whom, it seems the Netbeans folks are using pbranch
> (or contemplating the option) to stage changes.
>
> Peer is busy integrating pbranch into TortoiseHg, though I don't know
> if that is going to be accepted into TortoiseHg proper. Steve?
>
> Matt, any news on this? My offer to upgrade pbranch to use hg-style
> tests still stands. And now Waldemar is offering some cycles, too.

I see no reason not to bundle pbranch with the TortoiseHg installers
if Peer adds support for it in the tools.

--
Steve Borho