Difference between revisions of "Managing Local Changes with Mercurial Queues"
From gem5
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
* If any local change needs to be updated, it requires a separate commit. | * If any local change needs to be updated, it requires a separate commit. | ||
| − | * If you have several small, unrelated changes | + | * If you have several small, unrelated changes separate branches must be maintained. |
* Upstream changes must be merged into the local branches. | * Upstream changes must be merged into the local branches. | ||
Revision as of 17:57, 16 February 2013
Repository Management Problem
gem5 users typically opt to freeze their repository at a particular changeset when starting a new research project. This approach has several downsides:
- It discourages users from contributing back any useful changes they may develop.
- If a useful change is added upstream, it's a long, tedious process to update.
If a user chooses to keep their local repository up-to-date with the source tree they typically use named branches and merge any upstream changes into their branches. This approach also has its downsides:
- If any local change needs to be updated, it requires a separate commit.
- If you have several small, unrelated changes separate branches must be maintained.
- Upstream changes must be merged into the local branches.
A powerful tool that overcomes these problems is the mercurial queue extension.
Mercurial Queues
The mercurial queue extension is a powerful tool that allows you to:
- Manage small changes easily as a set of well-defined patches.
- Edit previous patches without having a new commit.
- Keep your local changes cleanly separated from upstream changes.
