On 6 Feb 2009, at 10:12, Paolo Losi wrote:
Henning Thielemann wrote:
4) hg commit -m "message" this commits my changes locally. I always do this before pulling since then I'm sure my changes are saved in the case a merge goes wrong. In old darcs its precisely the other way round. Since it is so slow on merging ready patches, you better merge uncrecorded changes.
IMO pulling & merging before commit is a good practise also for hg: it avoids a (very often useless) merge commit in the history.
I don't understand this view. Isn't the point of a commit that you flag working points. In each branch, before you merge (hopefully) you have a working repository, so flag it as such, and commit. When you merge, you may or may not have a working repository, fix it until it is, and merge. I would never do a merge without the two branches I was merging having a commit just before the merge. Bob