Hi Keith!
I suspect this was meant to go to the setools list. Anyway:
Keith Hodges <
[hidden email]> wrote:
> Having started to look at distributing the fruits of my labours, I
> discovered that Mercurial doesnt just clone my latest when I push a
> ChangeSet, but it pushes all of my work including all revisions as well.
> This may be ok when working with a few small text files, but I dont
> think it scales to squeak images.
>
> I think that a slightly more clever scheme is needed to manage squeak
> projects in mercurial.
The idea was never to actually "manage" the image - I was not expecting
lots and lots of changesets involving those files - only when we had a
new improved and built image to share.
So in other words - don't commit the image locally until you are
satisfied with it and intend to share it as the next revision of the
prebuilt dev image.
> My suggestion would be to have the repository to handle all of the text
> files and scripts. Then have the images (generated from the textfile
> scripts anyway) published as a patches, which can be separately managed.
I agree that large binaries are a problem generally but I think in this
case we just need to follow my advice above :).
> I need to investigate more.
>
> Goran,
>
> I have Completed a build on demo.gjallar.se and it is residing in the
> /home/gjallar/keith/newgjallar directory. I havent pushed it yet,
> because I am conscious of how much larger it will make the clone for
> everyone.
Ah. Right, didn't think of that. Ok, then yes, perhaps we should
distribute the image pair on the side somehow.
Btw, the intention was never to actually manage the image - only the
rest of the filetree.
regards, Göran
_______________________________________________
Seaside mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside
Locked
