Checkouts? Or just light bound branches?

[Jan Hudec]

On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 15:15:21 -0500, Aaron Bentley wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> It somewhat bothers me that checkouts and branches both have the concept
> of last-revision.  Considering that revision-history is the only concept
> that Branches represent, there's a lot of overlap.
> 
> It also bothers me that bound branches and checkouts will have the same
> behaviour implemented around last-revision: if local last-revision is
> not the same as upstream last-revision, fail.
> 
> Bound branches and checkouts will serve very similar use cases, so it
> seems funny that they use different concepts, and will require different
> day-to-day operations.
> 
> Until now, I haven't had much idea what to do.  But I just had one:
> instead of checkouts, use branches whose repositories are elsewhere.
> 
> This works nicely in that we're planning to allow branches to specify
> their repository location anyhow.
> 
> In terms of the local data location, little changes.
> 
> Checkout             Light Bound Branch
> ========             ==================
> - - inventory          - inventory
> - - pending-merges     - pending-merges
> - - branch location    - repository location
>  (implies repository
>   location)
> - - last-revision      - revision-history
> 
> In the repo, you still have a branch that is up-to-date, unless you
> slacken the binding.
> 
> I voiced a similar suggestion in the "Re: redirected and shared working
> trees" thread, but at the time I was talking about unifying the UI of
> checkouts and bound branches, not unifying their type.
> 
> Any thoughts?

Less concepts, less confusion, less code. I think it's a good idea.

-- 
						 Jan 'Bulb' Hudec <bulb at ucw.cz>
-------------- 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/20060126/19bad254/attachment.pgp