metronome mail for Bazaar 2.0 and 1.18

[Martin Albisetti]

On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 2:58 PM, Christian Robottom
Reis<kiko at canonical.com> wrote:
> Apart from feedback from the Launchpad team, what anecdotal evidence do
> we have of 2.0 quality?

I've upgraded all the branches in my office (100+) to 2a a few months
ago. It's a mix of very old branches (3+ years, migrated through
multiple formats), small (15mb) and big (4.2gb), committed from OSX
and Ubuntu.
The upgrade in general went smooth, and some branches that where
previously unusable in certain situations (branching and pushing big
changes) due to running out of RAM are now usable.
Disk space saving is nothing to be too excited about, I think it's
something along the lines of 10% overall, and, in over half the
branches, there was exactly zero space savings by upgrading from 1.9
(non-rich-root) to 2a. This is after manually running "bzr pack" on
each branch after upgrade. Without manually packing, in most cases the
branches are much larger than before.
I did need bash foo abd bzr plugins to upgrade them due to a lack of
features in bzr core (ability to delete backups after upgrades,
reconciling before upgrading, re-packing after an upgrade and deleting
obsolete_packs/*).
The only issue we've had is with a large branch, but both Robert and
John seem to be aware of the problem and working on it.

I haven't had any reports of 2a-specific problems since the upgrade,
although you should note that we don't use stacked branches or shared
repos, so the stress-test is fairly narrow.

-- 
Martin