Edit Question - KnowledgeHub

Title Body

This is a cousin question with my earlier question of "How to manage concurrent development with mercurial", which covers individual developer workflow. The answer to this question will actually influence the choice for developer workflow. This is NOT a general "release management best practice" or CI question, as it has been asked many times with good answers, and there's a huge body of literature available to kill time. I'm only asking for specific ways to use mercurial within the context of release management . The most obvious and predominant answer would supposedly be stable/default , which is thoroughly covered by the beautiful blog of @Steve Losh, and more concisely in an answer from him. It's simple and effective. A prominent example of this setup is hg itself. hg uses a few more repositories for active development, but for release management purposes everything seems to be contained in the stable/default branches of the main repo . The hg setup actually manifests a variation, or rather an extended version, of stable/default: branch clone . I described the process in <a hre

Tags (comma-separated) Cancel