RFC: icedtea-cacao branch vs. clone

[Lillian Angel]

Lillian Angel wrote:
> 
> 
> Mark Wielaard wrote:
>> Hi Christian,
>>
>> On Wed, 2007-09-05 at 16:21 +0200, Christian Thalinger wrote:
>>> We're planing to set up a IcedTea repository that has all necessary
>>> patches to run with CACAO as VM.  These patches include one or two
>>> patches for the OpenJDK build system and a patch we need for the binary
>>> wrappers from OpenJDK because of a problem with Boehm-GC.
>>>
>>> We should now decide what is better to use, a named branch or a seperate
>>> clone.  I'm, personally, in favor for a named branch, as merging with
>>> the default branch is very easy and we have a full history of all
>>> changes ever done in one single repository.
>>>
>>> Other opinions?
>>
>> We are still learning how to most effectively use mercurial as a group.
>> Personally I would have expected more people to just make clones of
>> icedtea and publish their own repos. But clearly people seem to like the
>> one shared repo approach even though technically that isn't really
>> necessary.
>>
>> Since we are using a shared published repo at the time I think it makes
>> sense to go for a named branch in that one IF the intent is to merge
>> that branch eventually with the default one. Is the idea that
>> icedtea-cacao eventually just becomes a configure option for icedtea
>> proper?
> 
> Yes, this is the idea. I think it would be best to have a named branch.


A named branch (cacao) has been created in the repo.
"hg up cacao" will switch from the default branch to the cacao branch.


Lillian