archives & nested trees

[Martin Pool]

On 17 Nov 2005, Jan Hudec <bulb at ucw.cz> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 11:48:27 +1100, Martin Pool wrote:
> > On 14 Nov 2005, John A Meinel <john at arbash-meinel.com> wrote:
> > > If we want to go back to named archives, with named mirrors, we can. But
> > > I'm certainly not settled that that is the best way to go. (For example,
> > > it makes having standalone branches difficult).
> > > We could make the naming optional. Where everything can be referenced by
> > > full path, but if you happen to have an archive named, it can also be
> > > referenced by that.
> > 
> > Yes, I think this may be the best way to do it.  To my mind the problem
> > with arch archive naming is not so much the names, but rather that they
> > propagate so strongly into revisions which are created within them, so
> > causing trouble with reuse of archive names, laptop mode, etc.
> > 
> > If the included-by-reference branches use aliases then it's reasonable
> > to expect people to register them before building.
> 
> Perhaps the include specification could state the alias and default
> definitions for the alias. Bzr would use whatever it already knows about the
> alias first and then try each of the provided defaults in turn until it
> succeeds in fetching the data.

Though then perhaps we should just use the canonical location instead of
the alias, and let the user register "also available at ..."

-- 
Martin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20051118/31b5ac40/attachment.pgp