I don't know about workflows specifically, but there is a very good reference [0] about Mercurial's branching models. Maybe this will help you.
[0] https://stevelosh.com/blog/2009/08/a-guide-to-branching-in-m...
What do you mean? It has a section on it:
https://stevelosh.com/blog/2009/08/a-guide-to-branching-in-m...
(I have not audited to see how accurate the information is, though).
> Then there's some new stuff that apparently are very good, but I can't find a proper description of how they work / should be used.
Yes - I often wished that someone wrote and maintained an article listing all the extensions that one likely will want to use.[1] One you may want to look into is evolve.
[1] Maybe someone has written this - I haven't checked in the last few years.
I personally use bookmarks. They're simple to use. However, people have issues using them in a team setting (by default it doesn't sync the bookmarks when there's a push, I think). I have not explored topics - looking at Heptapod it seems they prefer topics, so it may be the way to go.
If you're the only developer, then bookmarks should do everything you want.
go add a remote to an existing repo. lovely ux there.
and now you're telling me about bookmarks, I've a docs page open to read about phases, that seems kinda neat. at first glance thought it seems like a solved problem of protected branches and separate forks.
Interesting. I’m keen on trying Mercurial, but one thing that has somewhat confused me is the profusion of branch-like workflows. Named branches, bookmarks, now also topics (or whatever it’s called), hidden commits etc.
Is there a good definitive guide somewhere on the best workflows for hg?