looms: compatibility, performance, alternatives?

[David Reitter]

On 8 Jan 2009, at 18:32, Jonathan Lange wrote:
> They are meant to be used for collaboration, but you need to have the
> bzr-loom plugin installed. The answers would be different if that were
> the case.


I understand.  To make it clear where I'm coming from:

My downstream project publishes binaries and is separately advertised,  
which means we have something like "to build from source, do a bzr foo  
bar http://bzr.project.org/..."
That should allow people to obtain the tip.

If they don't have bzr-looms installed, then it should fail gracefully  
by simply hiding the segregation afforded by the looms plugin.

So maybe maintaining many different branches and one (downstream)  
trunk would be the best thing for us.  However, creating a new branch  
on the server takes about 4m30s, and costs in excess of 300MB server  
space.  (The actual difference between trunk and branch is minimal.)
When created with --stacked, the branch still takes more than a minute  
to create and 108MB space on the server.  Given that it is a shared  
repository, I didn't think --stacked was necessary.  Also, it appears  
as if the working tree is populated in the target branch, and that  
accounts for pretty much all of the space usage.  Do I need to re- 
create this repository with --no-trees?

bzr log takes about 40seconds for my test file (way too long),  bzr  
log --short takes 26sec (still too long).

This is with bzr 1.9. Repo is in development2 format.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2193 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20090109/1db5030e/attachment.bin