A few questions/potential issues in Bazaar-NG

[Aaron Bentley]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Matthieu Moy wrote:

> What's nice with the "append-only" is that it's easy to split the
> history in different archives (cheap remote branch). For example, when
> I microbranch from Bazaar (with baz), I usually do not create a
> cachedrev, and my archive contains only the part of the history I'm
> interested in.

I've done that too, and it makes me uncomfortable.  So I stopped doing
it, and just let it cacherev.  It means that your archive is dependent
on another resource to be usable.  It's essentially anti-distributed,
and it works best when you've got revlibs to use so that you rarely have
to hit up the remote archive.

Even if we went with revfiles or weavediffs, I would not recommend
creating dependent branches.

I think a better alternative to dependent archives and revlibs is
centralized storage: move the branch data out of the working tree, and
into a common area.

I described an approach here:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.bazaar-ng.general/1352/match=centralized

Centralized storage would solve this problem by ensuring that there was
only one copy of each revision's files stored, no matter how many
branches were on the hard disk.  So the costs of each additional branch
are propotional to the numbe of unique changes in that branch. And
they're independent of remote branches.

> By curiosity: Is there a particular reason for not using your
> append-only weave?

- - It's very young, and hasn't had much review
- - It hasn't been implemented
- - We don't need it yet
- - If we do need it, we should be able to transition to it easily.

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

iD8DBQFDCQM70F+nu1YWqI0RAtCLAJ9KD4KzNNU1YvjDwRoZsI3fv9FL0QCghQLQ
/Fo8iUvQcW5oI9OxbTz+CL8=
=DTs/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----