[PLUGIN] bzr uncommit updated

[John A Meinel]

Kevin Smith wrote:
> John Yates wrote:
> 
>> and if we assume that the vast majority of
>> Windows boxes likely to run bzr will be W2K or later
>> and will be NTFS-based, then you can exploit hardlinks.
> 
> 
> I don't think it makes a big difference in the current discussion, but 
> many (most?) W2K boxes still use FAT32, and even many XP boxes.
> 
> My real agenda for this post is to pontificate that it's great to take 
> advantage of hardlinks when available, but that no important 
> functionality should rely heavily on them. Fortunately, the bzr team 
> already seems to believe that.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Kevin
> 
> 

Actually, with weavefiles, you don't get a lot of benefit from 
hardlinks. Since once you make a change to a file, all hard links are 
broken. (The plus side is that they don't take up much space to start with).
Although, you could actually leave the hardlink in place. Considering 
that having extra information doesn't hurt.

John
=:->

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20050926/cba63012/attachment.pgp