So many repo formats

[Robert Collins]

On Mon, 2008-11-17 at 16:42 +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> Robert Collins <robertc at robertcollins.net> writes:
> 
> > On Sun, 2008-11-16 at 23:45 -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > > > Here's a decision tree:
> > > > Are you working with an existing project?
> > > > Yes: Use whatever they are using. bzr will do this for you by default.
> > > 
> > > > Are you using bzr-svn?
> > > > Yes: use 1.9-rich-root
> > > 
> > > > Are working with big trees(5K+paths) or deep history (5K+revisions)?
> > > > Yes: use 1.9, if your team is able to (e.g. not version-locked to an
> > > >      old bzr due to corporate policy)
> > > 
> > > > Otherwise: do not specify formats to any commands, bzr will Just
> > > > Work.
> > > 
> > > How 'bout if you're using bzr-svn with deep history or big trees?
> > 
> > 1.9-rich-root, its covered already :).
> 
> I think the point was that the above list of questions doesn't make it
> clear whether or not one should proceed to “big trees or deep history”
> after having answered “bzr-svn”.

Ah. So for clarity 'stop-at-the-first-yes:'
-- 
GPG key available at: <http://www.robertcollins.net/keys.txt>.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20081117/ad82f36c/attachment.pgp