Is bzr *appropriate* and *ready* for me?

[Jari Aalto]

Erik Bågfors <zindar at gmail.com> writes:

>> The distributed bzr is for something. When it gets support for
>> centralized storage, it may become "all around" SCM.
>
>
> Please explain to me, in which way you think that bzr doesn't support
> centralized storage.  There is no problem pushing and pulling from a
> central storage (the only thing missing is checkouts).

What I meant that SVN, CVS and the like "star systems" automatically
handle out-of-synch problems, because the connection point to all of
these is the same. This is ideal and preferred for sotuation where one
prefers to be "up to date" with same configuration all the time.

        Host A                     Host B
        .. do hacking              (becomes out of synch)
        .. check in

        => now move to host B
                                        
                                   Host B
                                   .. edit, and check in
                                   .. oops, conflict
                                   .. ok, update changes here first
                                   .. then continue

All changes are stored in central point.

I'm not that familiar with distributed system yet (or bzr), but I
understood that the user must specifically "push" the changes
somewhere. This has to be manually repeated in every Host. Otherwise
the changes stay local.

I'm not even sure where would be the centralized push be in bzr case?
Can someone explain how to accomplish similar "star system"?

           \ | /
          -  o  -
           / | \

Jari