RFC: Would you care if mq stopped storing patch files physically on disk?

[Kyle Altendorf]

On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 11:53 PM, Peter Arrenbrecht
<peter.arrenbrecht at gmail.com> wrote:
> People reading the devel list may have noticed I am trying to rethink
> and unify mq and pbranch. They are both solutions to what mpm calls
> malleable history. This is also the aspect that I'm interested in:
> malleable parts of history within an hg repo. So part of the plan is
> to get rid of the physical patch files by default. This would free us
> from a bunch of limitations inherited from quilt's approach to patch
> management. However, the latter must also have its merits.
>
> So, are you using the fact that mq stores the patch files physically
> on disk in your workflows? If so, how? What are the crucial aspects
> for you?

http://hgbook.red-bean.com/read/managing-change-with-mercurial-queues.html#sec:mq:repo

To a limited degree I have turned the patches folder into a repository
itself to share patches amongst various copies of the main repository.
 Seemed useful to me.

-kyle

>
> Note: Import/export to quilt-style patch queues would still be
> supported, but the physical files would no longer be the master copy.
>
> Cheers,
> -parren
> _______________________________________________
> Mercurial mailing list
> Mercurial at selenic.com
> http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial
>