2.0 upgrade experiences

Stephen J. Turnbull stephen at xemacs.org
Thu Aug 13 04:55:09 BST 2009

Robert Collins writes:

 > SQL databases have a similar thing where temporary data causes disk
 > space to grow, then shrink - and I haven't yet seen applications that
 > build on them give me such warnings.
 > I wonder what it is about our case that makes people so interested and
 > concerned about this? 

Bloat factor of 10 for bzr vs. 10% for databases?  "Compressing" the
repo results in *more* space used?  Lack of colocated branches?
They're not paid to requisition and install more disk space as needed,
while RDBMS admins are paid to manage storage (in some sense, that's
their *whole* job)?[1]

The other problem you face is selling bzr as "the dVCS that adapts to
*your* workflow."  The audience much of your marketing targets (cf the
"new look web site" and "remove traceback" threads) Just Don' Wanna
Know.  But a factor of 10 space expansion (or even factor of 2) is a
really in-your-face thing.

[1]  Yes, I know people use RDBMSes for personal applications, but
they expect industrial-strength software to come with industrial-
strength resource usage.  Version control, even in a large corporate
setting, is a more human-scale application, and people expect it to
fit in with their preconceptions.

More information about the bazaar mailing list