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

[John A Meinel]

Jari Aalto wrote:
> 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
> 

You might check out my 'bound-branch' version of bzr. Which should land
soon, now that branch-formats has landed.

Basically, the idea is that you still have a local branch and a central
branch. But you "bzr bind" the local branch to the central one. Thereby
informing it that you don't want to commit if you are out of date. (So
you must pull/update before you can commit).

> All changes are stored in central point.

And, naturally, it commits the changes to the remote location on every
commit.

> 
> 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 

Yes, right now, you do have to run "bzr push" after "bzr commit" to put
them in a central location. But you can just have a branch located on a
shared access machine, that different people push to.

In the future, as part of some other refactoring, we will support
'checkouts' which won't have a local repository. (With bound branches,
if you are on your laptop, and get on a plane, you can 'bzr unbind' and
keep working, with a checkout you can't do anything. You can't annotate,
etc).

The only thing that isn't in bzr right now is forcing commits to go to a
remote location. But I've written the code to do it. (The only thing
that prevented it going in before now is that we wanted a branch format
bump, so that old clients wouldn't commit to the local branch, and
violate the binding).

John
=:->


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20060208/9aa20374/attachment.pgp