Looms compatible default format?

[Robert Collins]

On Fri, 2009-05-01 at 05:09 +0200, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:

> That seems reasonable; it would be nice if it could be part of 2.0
> though, and that's the reason I'm bringing it up now. Is the sprint too
> late for format changes?

I very much doubt we can solve the UI issues we want to during 2.0
without altering how bzr handles branches and repositories; including
Loom's needs *before* 2.0 is problematic in several ways:
 - simple colocated branches can't represent what loom needs
 - loom needs things multiple branches don't
 - loom doesn't have everything loom wants.
 - it won't reduce the need to change things later [e.g. as the outcome
of the sprint] unless we happen to get it just right now. And I don't
we'll get that by rushing it and doing it with frazzled attention.

-Rob
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20090501/feca40e0/attachment.pgp