Recipes vs. Looms vs. pipelines

[John Arbash Meinel]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Vincent Ladeuil wrote:
>>>>>> "barry" == Barry Warsaw <barry at canonical.com> writes:
> 
> <snip/>
> 
>     barry> loom                            non-loom
>     barry> ----                            --------
>     barry> bzr down-thread rocketfuel      bzr merge ../devel
>     barry> bzr pull                        bzr commit -m'Merge rocketfuel'
>     barry> bzr up-thread --auto
> 
> Nice, I never put words on that but I share the feeling. In my
> mental model the "loom way" is: let's restart what I'm doing
> based on today's trunk, whereas the "non-loom" way is: let's see
> what happen if I bring trunk into my branch.
> 
> Or said otherwise: one inject the new trunk from the bottom when
> the other inject it from the top.
> 
> Of course the resulting tree is the same, but since they produce
> different histories, the resulting branches tend to behave a bit
> differently too when you start landing part of your work on the
> trunk and that you re-inject the trunk
> 
>       Vincent
> 

Actually, those produce the exact same history. What you are describing
"verbally" sounds a lot more like the rebase workflow. Where you bring
in trunk at the 'bottom' of your changes and put them all on top.

I guess if you have more than 1 feature thread the history might be
different.

John
=:->

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAksqPicACgkQJdeBCYSNAANyCQCgyvIfx6PE4Azt6+DvWjCPLMkX
u7EAn3UkUWCADEhMvOS8sUVd8DhAgoFJ
=9WGm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----