Changing the UI of checkout
Matthew D. Fuller
fullermd at over-yonder.net
Sun Apr 19 15:51:17 BST 2009
On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 01:59:44AM +1000 I heard the voice of
Ian Clatworthy, and lo! it spake thus:
> IMO, the bottom line is that they smell the same but they're really
> quite different beasts.
These are arguments against bugs, not against concepts.
> * lightweight checkout = tree & a *reference* to a branch
> * heavyweight checkout = tree+branch & a *bind* to a second branch.
It's that these implementation details are exposed that causes the
> And we simply don't *need* heavyweight checkouts when we have bound
> branches as well. They're redundant to all intents and purposes.
But I do. I don't want a bound branch. I want a checkout that
doesn't wander across the network except when it has to, and that has
enough information cached that I can use it as the source for a local
'bzr branch' if the network or server is down.
Matthew Fuller (MF4839) | fullermd at over-yonder.net
Systems/Network Administrator | http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/
On the Internet, nobody can hear you scream.
More information about the bazaar