Help promoting Bazaar

Talden talden at
Thu Jul 15 23:47:15 BST 2010

On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 10:29 AM, Chris Hecker <checker at> wrote:
> Ah, cool.  I assume it doesn't "coagulate" branches reconfigured like this?
>  In other words, if I have A, and then branch A to B, and then reconfigure A
> into C like below, and then reconfigure B into C as well, it's not going to
> be the same as having branched A to B inside of C, will it?

I assume here you mean something like

CMD> bzr init A
CMD> bzr branch A B
CMD> bzr init-repo C
CMD> mv A C; bzr reconfigure --use-shared C/A
CMD> mv B C; bzr reconfigure --use-shared C/B

Branches A and B now use the shared repo C and are related in the same
way they were before - A is the parent of B.

If the shared repo were tree-less you'd still need to explicitly
remove the trees of A and B - reconfiguring them to use the shared
repo doesn't remove the working trees since those branches are allowed
to have working trees in a treeless shared-repo - they just aren't
created by default. EG 'bzr branch C/A C/foo'.  foo won't get a
working tree but will use the shared-repo.


More information about the bazaar mailing list