Changing the UI of checkout

[Eugene Wee]

On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 12:56 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull
<stephen at xemacs.org> wrote:
> My point is precisely that committing from a checkout is a bad idea,
> because it's not guaranteed to succeed.  There are other uses for
> checkouts that don't involve "working on" (== making changes to) them,
> such as source trees for beta testing and release distribution.
>
> Not if someone commits first from another checkout or bound branch.
> Now you can't commit, even if there are no conflicts.  Worse, in order
> to commit from the checkout you must damage the state of the checkout.

It seems to me that if checkouts are lightweight, they would then fall
into your party line: using them to get source trees for beta testing
and release distribution makes sense and the user would not be
checking history so a history cache would not be useful. Using them to
reference and commit to local branches as in the
"shared-tree-across-branches workspace model" would not raise your
objection since a reasonable user would not be committing to the local
branch from another checkout anyway (and presumably no one else can do
so since it is all local).

Regards,
Eugene Wee