Simplified Tutorial

[Ramon Diaz-Uriarte]

On 5/7/06, John Arbash Meinel <john at arbash-meinel.com> wrote:

(...) [lots of stuff deleted]
>
> I don't know if 'shared repository' is a great term to be using. I think
> we started using it, because we have been a little focused on the
> implementation. And I'm realizing we need to step back a little bit, and
> come at it from a user, rather than as a developer.
> A repository is a repository, and it may have the 'shared' bit set.
> Which tells other branches to use it, rather than creating their own.
>
> And I think that is the way we can make it clear in user's minds. "If
> you create a repository with 'bzr init-repo', branches in subdirectories
> will use it for storing history. Otherwise, each branch will create its
> own repository inside the .bzr directory for that branch".
>
> I don't have to use the word 'shared' at all for that explanation. I
> think it is relatively clear, and is a true statement (always a bonus :)
>
> What if we change the help text for init-repo to:
>
> Create a repository where branches can share history storage.
>
> New branches created under the repository directory will store their
> revisions in the repository, rather than creating a separate repository
> inside the branch directory (if the branch format supports shared storage).
>
>


For what is worth, this is certainly much clearer to me. However, it
might help if it is explained (probably not in the command line help,
but somewhere else, like a tutotiral or doc) what are the pros/cons of
each in terms of storage space, speed, simplicity of merging, etc.

--
Ramon Diaz-Uriarte
Bioinformatics Unit
Spanish National Cancer Centre (CNIO)
http://ligarto.org/rdiaz