Pushing to an FTP server not supporting APPE

John Arbash Meinel john at arbash-meinel.com
Tue Jun 20 18:39:46 BST 2006

Matthieu Moy wrote:
> John Arbash Meinel <john at arbash-meinel.com> writes:
>> I do believe that if you switch your public branch to being a Weave
>> format, things will work again. Though you lose all the advantages of
>> knits. But if your server doesn't support APPE, then you've already lost
>> them.
> I'm just realizing that *I* would lose the advantages of knits, but
> people accessing my archive with HTTP would still like to have knits.
> Furthermore, knits have better chance to remain well supported in the
> future.
> Indeed, if FTP is slow, I can "push" as a background process, but
> other people will want to "pull" and "merge" quickly.
> Well, I'm not sure I'd use it, anyway, since I'd prefer finding an ISP
> which gives me better performance using APPE, but it might be a
> good-to-have (I had already patched the ftp transport to retry on
> failure, which allowed using free.fr, one of the main ISP in France,
> I'm disapointed that this is now useless ;-) ).

Well, if you really want it, we could support an APPE fallback which
downloads the remote content, appends to it, and then pushes the whole
thing back.
It will be slow, but it would be an easy fix, and would mean that it
would work.

The problem is that we can't just push what we have, because the remote
content may be different.
Obviously if we could do some sort of caching, so that if we fell back
to a pull + push, we could keep what we just pushed up, and then only
push up new stuff after that.

I could definitely see doing something like this in a plugin. I'm not
sure about doing it in the core of bzr.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 254 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20060620/e1cc224d/attachment.pgp 

More information about the bazaar mailing list