[MERGE REQUEST] Couple of small fixes

[John Arbash Meinel]

Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
...

> 
> While breadth-first search might work, it would slow down bzr-native
> branches, especially if we would eventually gain support for remote
> SVN, git and darcs branches. 
>

Well, ultimately it is a tradeoff. We could do a little bit of both, so
that it would first check bzr everywhere, and then check for other
types, but people could explicitly state a type.

I think that gets into too much voodoo, and it is probably easiest just
to have a set of prefixes so people can state what type of branch they want.

>>To clarify: we would introduce bzr+file:// bzr+http:// bzr+sftp://, as
>>well as svn+http://, etc.
>>For compatibility (and the common use case), an plain path, http:// and
>>sftp:// are all treated with their bzr+ prefixes.
> 
> Is the + standardised somewhere in a RFC or something? This does look
> like the sanest idea to me.

I don't know if it is standardized. But I believe svn already uses it.
(svn+ssh).

> 
> 
>>Then we would have a Transport list, but we would also have a Branch
>>registry.
> 
> I guess that would rather be a Branch type as not all Branch types
> would use the Transport class (e.g., SvnBranch uses the svn client
> libraries to access remote repositories).

Well, BzrBranch could still use the Transport registry. We would just
add one more layer above it.

John
=:->

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 256 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20051215/9a4eea70/attachment.pgp