BZR 2.1.2 + SVN 1.7.7 + etckeeper on Debian Squeeze

[JP Vossen]

On 11/02/2012 07:33 PM, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 16:42 -0400, JP Vossen wrote:
>> But...  If I do have both .svn and .bzr, how do I choose which 'bzr'
>> will use?  (I *am* going to have that situation at $WORK soon, though
>> that'll be on Windows (yuck).)
>
> There is no way to pick one over the other; there isn't a particular
> reason to have both version the same directory - that's what bzr-svn is
> designed to handle.

My reason for having both .svn and .bzr is simple--in-line SVN + BZR. 
As detailed in 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/2012q2/074983.html I'm already 
doing that with great success with CVS + BZR, but we're soon switching 
to SVN despite my strong push for BZR.

SVN is OK (anything is better than CVS), but I prefer to use BZR, so 
I'll use both.  SVN will be read-write to the public/production repo and 
my actual daily work will be in BZR.  Thus I guess my solution will be 
to remove or disable the bzr-svn plugin.

I know that's an odd, possibly unique work-flow, but for a number of 
reasons out-of-scope of this email it really does work quite well for 
me, so...

Thanks again for your thoughts,
JP

PS--Jelmer, you may be amused to learn that Samba plays a critical role 
in all of this as well.  The details are ugly, but include a 
Windows-only VPN, a WinXP VM, a Samba-served "H:" drive and a lot of SSH 
sessions...  :-)
----------------------------|:::======|-------------------------------
JP Vossen, CISSP            |:::======|      http://bashcookbook.com/
My Account, My Opinions     |=========|      http://www.jpsdomain.org/
----------------------------|=========|-------------------------------
"Microsoft Tax" = the additional hardware & yearly fees for the add-on
software required to protect Windows from its own poorly designed and
implemented self, while the overhead incidentally flattens Moore's Law.