<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd"><html> <head> <meta name="Generator" content="Zarafa WebAccess v6.03-10306"> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252"> <title>RE: Re: Stacked branching question</title> <style type="text/css"> body { font-family: Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px; padding: 5px 5px 5px 5px; margin: 0px; border-style: none; background-color: #ffffff; } p, ul, li { margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; } </style> </head> <body>  My point is exactly that there should be enough information in a shallow branch to be able to do a diff and thus derive a delta.That is what I meant by a _little_ bit of depth. The little bit of depth being one revision deep. (In other word not zero revisions deep).  It is exactly from the use-case you mentioned that I am coming from. If you think about what I said should be possible (e.g diff on local changes)it is implicit that there should be something local to diff on (and thus provide a basis for the deltas you say are essential)   <blockquote style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(50, 95, 186); padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px;">-----Original message----- From: Colin D Bennett <colin@gibibit.com> Sent: Mon 07/21/08 17:57:15 To: David Ingamells <david.ingamells@mapscape.eu>; CC: Nicholas Allen <allen@ableton.com>; Martin Pool <mbp@canonical.com>; Bazaar <bazaar@lists.canonical.com>; Subject: Re: Stacked branching question On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 16:24:03 +0200 David Ingamells <david.ingamells@mapscape.eu> wrote: > I concur with Nicholas. It is my hope that one should be able to do > everything that moves forward from the branched revno without any > need for the repositories further down the stack. Thus "commit", > "diff" (on local changes) and "status" should all work without > needing to look outside the local branch. However, when stacked branches are used as a more flexible substitute for shared repositories (think: a multi user hosting service or a team's multi user VCS server), it is desirable to have commits be able to be stored as deltas from past revision data, especially when dealing with large files. So I think that if at some point an offline commit to a stacked branch is permitted, it should be an optional feature since it would eliminate the possibility of storing the new revision as a delta based on revision data from the stacked-on branch. > Obviously "missing", "diff" > with old revno's, "log" etc will be crippled without access to the > repos below the top of the stack. > After all, this enhancement did start off life with the name 'shallow > branches' and the term 'shallow' does imply a _little_ bit of > depth ;-) > Regards, Colin </blockquote> </body> </html>