simple use case advice

[Martin Pool]

On 4 October 2010 12:01, Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen at xemacs.org> wrote:
> Martin Pool writes:
>
>  > stay there.  But it's easy to hurt yourself this way, by accidentally
>  > copying over the top of something you didn't mean to replace.  I would
>  > really recommend switching a working tree by either having it bound to
>  > a separate bzr branch (bzr checkout br1 work; cd work; bzr switch
>  > ../br2), or by using bzr-colo.
>
> He doesn't already have the branch, so you need to include the
> branching steps, too.
>
> AFAIK using switch effectively requires a well-designed workflow, and
> bzr-colo is still pretty alpha, or at best early beta, no?
>
> So it's a tradeoff.  I've *never* shot myself in the foot doing things
> the way I suggested; I don't think it's that "easy" to make that kind
> of mistake.  Nevertheless I don't recommend it, just mentioned that
> it's an option if preserving build products is important.  And of
> course I would *never* use it if I didn't absolutely need cruft from
> the origin branch.

In my experience bzr colo looks very reliable and polished.  I would
call it at least a solid beta.  As you like git-style workflows I
would really like to hear what you think of it.

-- 
Martin