Shallow branches question

[Erik Bågfors]

I don't quite agree

Say that I have a 45k revision repo. The whole point of not having the
whole repo is
1) Disk space
2) Performance

If bzr automatically goes to the network to get the pieces that's
missing, performance will suffer.

If I have a shallow branch, I'd prefer it to not go to the network and
ask. However, it should indicate that full history is not availiable,
and perhaps with an option, go to the network.

/Erik

On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 11:45 PM, Nicholas Allen
<nick.allen at onlinehome.de> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  Hash: SHA1
>
>
>  |
>
> | With the current code, we try to access all the repositories, so I
>  | believe it will just fail if the network is not accessible.  However,
>  | it does give us a platform for building that kind of policy in the
>  | future - to say "don't access if it's not reachable", or indeed "don't
>  | try to access anyhow".
>  |
>
>  I hoped that "bzr log" would always show my local revisions and, if not
>  connected to the network, then a message below indicating that it could
>  not retrieve further revisions from the remote location. When online it
>  would show both local and remote revisions.
>
>  Likewise, annotate would show the lines that were modified locally and
>  indicate somehow that it is a partial annotation. When remote it would
>  show a full annotation though.
>
>  So basically, all commands would work but indicate that there is some
>  missing information when not online. When online they would show everything.
>
>  That would be cool ;-)
>
>  Nick
>  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>  Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
>
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
>  iD8DBQFH1bn81+i51gqqEGkRAmygAKCEYeyjWMCK5nEUnQnL3BXZhA6AtACfS0OS
>  4yR8vu9OhvazzgeFD20FsXQ=
>  =G9JV
>  -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>