[RFC] Represent Loom threads using branches

[James Henstridge]

2008/5/1 Robert Collins <robertc at robertcollins.net>:
> On Thu, 2008-04-24 at 08:25 -0400, Aaron Bentley wrote:
>  > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  > Hash: SHA1
>  >
>  > I've been using the loom plugin pretty heavily, and I still feel like
>  > loom threads should be branches.
>
>  My initial feelings are this is going to be hugely more complex for
>  managing the loom history, and have significant performance implications
>  too. (I expect large loom scenarios to number in the hundreds of
>  patches). It will also remove the deliberate simplification of threads
>  (which is not an implementation detail, its a deliberate design
>  decision).
>
>  I will read your mail in more detail over the next couple of days.

In one of my uses of looms so far, I have been pushing individual
threads to separate locations.

With the loom only remembering one of those locations and the threads
being related, there is a danger that a plain "bzr push" will push the
wrong code to a location.

If you don't feel that full branches are appropriate for loom threads,
perhaps providing separate BranchConfigs is.  Perhaps use one section
in .bzr/branch/branch.conf per thread?

James.