Comments on: mercurial tasks extension

By: alu

alu — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 04:12:47 +0000

Hi Josh,
Yes I haven’t kept up hgtasks lately, I’m sorry about that.

I will try to do a better job of maintaining it. I have some ideas I would like to implement and I will try to keep active on the bitbucket page as well.

Thanks.

By: Josh

Josh — Thu, 14 Oct 2010 16:13:25 +0000

Hey Alu! Your ‘hg tasks’ is broken on hg 1.5.x and hg 1.6.x. People have submitted bug reports and others and submitted patch files. You should evaluate the patches and push up fixes so those of us on newer mercurials can use your extension. Feel free to reject patches and give reasons if you feel something wasn’t fixed properly.

There’s been no activity from you on bitbucket in a year, but you’re here discussing your extension. At least comment on bugs so we know you haven’t abandoned the project.

By: Bob W

Bob W — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 18:56:48 +0000

That would produce some really odd behavior if you accidentally activated the taskname:begin bookmark and started committing (after you’d already made some commits to advance the taskname bookmark), wouldn’t it?

…On the other hand…what if you had a tag for the beginning, and a bookmark for the progress…hmm. I think you’d still have more potential for accidentally losing that “what commits have to do with this task” bit. I’d have to look in greater detail to figure out if I’m right.

Since I’m mostly using hg as an svn superclient to trunk-at-root repositories at the moment, trying out use cases for me is a little contrived.

By: Mark

Mark — Mon, 16 Aug 2010 08:36:12 +0000

Couldn’t you make tasks just be a frontend for bookmarks — where you have two bookmarks per task (e.g. a “taskname:begin” bookmark, and a “taskname” bookmark)? Then it would be possible to use the already available bookmark-pushing capabilities of mercurial.

By: Bob W

Bob W — Thu, 01 Jul 2010 18:21:26 +0000

So…tasks, then, are basically like bookmarks that record every changeset that has been a part of them (instead of only the tip), and that provide you with an extra filter in front of the multiple-head-catch, which (depending on your workflow) may be more convenient than always pushing with -r?

I’m going to have to look into this; it sounds really interesting. Two things that have me curious are what happens if you DO push with -r, and what happens if you try to rebase a task.

By: alu

alu — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 06:57:15 +0000

Hi Ryan,
For me, this highlights the differences:

“For me bookmarks lack two features: tracking all changesets belonging to a particular task, and being able to push completed tasks easily while ensuring that incomplete tasks are not pushed.”

Dilip, yes mq can do a lot of the same things (and a lot more!), but I wanted something that worked by adding some metadata on a regular hg repo instead of a stack of patches.

-Alex

By: Ryan

Ryan — Fri, 09 Apr 2010 19:14:41 +0000

Let me expand my question: this looks very similar to Mercurial’s bookmarks extension. Can you highlight the differences?

By: Ryan

Ryan — Tue, 06 Apr 2010 18:00:14 +0000

So the main difference from the bookmarks extension is that this protects you from pushing incomplete tasks?

By: Dilip

Dilip — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 15:39:04 +0000

Just explored mq! the same stuff can be done using it.if we think each task as a patch!

By: Dilip

Dilip — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 08:40:47 +0000

A great extension. But won;t work on windows

D:\repos\hgoff>hg task
*** failed to import extension tasks from “D:\repos\hgoff\.hg\tasks.py”: [Errno 22] Invali
d argument
hg: unknown command ‘task’
Mercurial Distributed SCM