I am using Mercurial named branch to mark a big thread of development (CustomerA branch).
When starting work on CustomerB changes (in the same repo), I have forgotten to start named branch (Customer B) from the very beginning.
I have the following history in my repo:
CustomerA-1 > CustomerA-2 > CustomerA-3 > CustomerA-8 > CustomerA-9
|
> CustomerA-4 > CustomerA-5 > CustomerB-6 > CustomerB-7
Is there any negative impact from leaving it "as-is"? Are there specific practical issues with any Mercurial workflows (merging, switching between branches, cloning, etc) if I leave "4" and "5" changesets "as is", even though logically they belong to CustomerB branch? For example, "5" appears in the list of "hg heads", will it have any adverse impact?
There are good answers on stackoverflow on how to fix it, but I don't want to rewrite history, unless this situation can cause specific pain points in future: