So many repo formats

[Stefan Monnier]

>> > > 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 :).

> Although Stefan likes functional languages, I'm sure he can simulate
> one at need.<wink>

> I would guess his question is "does 1.9-rich-root cost anything
> relative to 1.9 in big trees and/or with deep history, or do I really
> get the free lunch of 1.9 performance with rich-root features?"  Even
> if that's not Stefan's question, this inquiring mind would like to
> know.

I see I'm fairly transparent ;-)
Yes, part of the subsequent question is "what is the point of the
1.9-non-rich-root format"?  To tell you the truth, I have no idea what
"rich root" means and I've never found a page that tries to explain it
other than "you need it for things like bzr-svn".


        Stefan