Centralized storage in bzr

Aaron Bentley aaron.bentley at utoronto.ca
Tue Jun 14 06:56:56 BST 2005

Hash: SHA1

Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 12:57 am, Aaron Bentley wrote:

>>So if optional centralized storage is a good idea, how do we hold on to
>>as many of the advantages of independent branches as we can?
> I think it's important to make it optional, and I'd argue, not the default 
> situation.

Yes, I tend to agree.  Probably there should be a way for the user to
tell bzr to centralize all future branches by default.

> Centralised storage is certainly useful for people with many copies of large 
> trees (like kernel hackers), but for most users I don't think it's that 
> important.

I think centralized storage is useful as soon as you try to download a
branch that's related to another branch you have already downloaded.  So
not "many" copies-- two is enough.  Honestly, I'm getting tired of
downloading mbp at sourcefrog.net-20050309040815-13242001617e4a06 every
time I want to get something based on bzr.  It seems silly to download
stuff that I already have.

> One of the things that makes darcs and rcs so easy to use is that you don't 
> have to setup a repo and get the perms right and so on.

Hmm.  Possible misperception here.  The main purpose was to permit one
hacker to store all his branch data in one place.  So for most uses,
it's quite difficult to get the perms wrong.  This storage could be
shared by multiple users, but that wasn't the driving purpose.

Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


More information about the bazaar mailing list