[PATCH] Branch and pull-- now with remote

[duchier at ps.uni-sb.de]

Martin Pool <mbp at sourcefrog.net> writes:

>> Getting somewhat off-topic here.  When it comes to remote branches.  I
>> know you Martin has been talking about having inteligence on both
>> sides of the pipe. I think this would be a good idea, however, I also
>> think that it's needed to have support for remote dumb storage.
>
> Yes, I certainly want remote dumb storage.  Writing to remote dumb
> storage is a bit harder because of the need to get the locking and
> permissions right, but I think it can be done in this model.

This is getting back to something I mentioned a while back (revlib server
ideas).  The point to keep in mind is that even when the backend is dumb, you
are talking to a smart server: it's just that the smart server is then running
in the client.

I think that it is essential to not make the same mistake as arch: namely,
dumbing it all down to operations on a file system.  Let the interface to the
specific backend dumb things down where necessary, but leave open the
possibility of smarter backends.

--Denys