efficiency over NFS

[Mohit Aron]

>
> > And if I do have a workspace on the local disk with the repository on
> > NFS, then I'll have to continously worry about commiting my changes so
> > that they go into the repository and are backed up by NFS.
>
> I believe that if code isn't worth committing, it's probably not worth
> backing up either.  So backed-up repositories are not a special reason
> for me to commit.
>


That's not true. I write several hundred lines of code during the day and
while writing it, I'm thinking about the code and not about committing it
every now and then. Loosing any of what I've written would be very
upsetting.



>
> > Also, isn't the motto supposed to be that one should think about
> > the code and not about version control and backups ?
>
> I see version control as very relevant to the code.  There are ways of
> developing code that interact well with version control, and ways that
> interact horribly.



And so 'bzr' should strive to accomodate the various common ways that people
operate - just as it has done an excellent job on supporting the various
workflows that people use. Other version control systems force a particular
workflow on the users. Similarly, bazaar should provide the 'edit' command
as an option and not force a particular mode on the user.

Many people in this email thread have argued on using the local disk vs NFS,
committing changes often etc. That's all a change of style that one has to
make to accomodate the version control system. I think its the version
control system that should accomodate the user, not the other way round.


- Mohit
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20080306/96e132a8/attachment-0001.htm