Checkouts? Or just light bound branches?

[Aaron Bentley]

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

Hi Jan,

I think you're misreading me.  When I talk about checkouts below, I'm
referring to the concept of working-tree-plus-last-revision, not
bound-branch-with-shared-repository.

Jan Hudec wrote:
> The last-revision can't be separate when they are one!
> 
> Definition:
> Checkout = Bound branch with working tree and dislocated storage
> (sharing storage with the branch it is bound to).

No, that's not the definition I'm using in this email.  See above.
9
>>I mean that bound branches are produced with 'bzr branch --bind', while
>>checkouts are produced with 'bzr checkout'.  I mean that you can't
>>unbind a checkout.  It's been suggested that bound branches are updated
>>with 'bzr update', but how do you update a checkout, then?  It gets
>>complicated for a checkout of a bound branch.  Do you always update both?
> 
> 
> Under the proposal there is no both. 'bzr checkout' is an alias for
> 'bzr branch --bind --share-storage'. 

Again, I'm *comparing* my proposal to the original idea for checkouts.

Under my proposal, "checkout of a bound branch" translates to "bound
branch using the repository of the bound branch, which is, in turn, a
bound branch."

So yes, there still is "both".

>>I'm not sure the offline distinction is going to be very relevent.  I
>>think the recommended case for (checkouts/light bound branches) will be
>>that the repository is on the same host, anyhow, because even LANs
>>aren't as fast as local storage.  Either that, or we cache.
> 
> 
> Well, I think that they would likely share storage when the parent is local
> (and thus it'd be a "checkout"), while if the parent is remote, it would copy
> the data (and thus it'd be a "bound branch"). There is no other difference
> between the two things.

Instead of having a direct remote parent, I expect it to be common to
have a repository branch with a remote parent, and to have a local
light-bound-branch whose parent is the local repository branch.


>>I don't see how you get away from having to verify both the checkout's
>>last-revision and the branch's last revision, e.g. when you have a
>>checkout of a bound branch.
> 
> 
> It's not a checkout of a bound branch. It is that checkout IS a bound branch.

That's not what I'm discussing.  I'm discussing checkouts.

Aaron
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFD2nSC0F+nu1YWqI0RAsH6AJwOdq9tenYZL57aWZZxMqDBBfPNdwCeLfoi
kkvpE6UDFbgFA6yYLq6f5sI=
=JFLO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----