Changing the UI of checkout
crystalrecursion at gmail.com
Mon Apr 20 06:52:44 BST 2009
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).
More information about the bazaar