[RFC] Should we rewrite nested-trees or our formats or punt?

[Ian Clatworthy]

Aaron Bentley wrote:

> Option 3:
> Lie about subtree support
> 
> We can land a brisbane-core format that supports subtrees but claims not
>  to.  Or alternatively, we can have a config option to enable subtree
> support (i.e. in locations.conf).

I think we should do this (3) immediately. We can then start work on (1)
and see where it's at leading up to the RC. (The RC may still be 2 weeks
away.)

I'll be impressed if you can have (1) done in time. The extra CHK is
probably pretty quick to implement but the dirstate changes could be
a challenge.

When I drafted http://bazaar-vcs.org/Roadmap/BrisbaneCore/PlusOne a few
nights ago, I certainly wasn't expecting nested-trees to be over the line
this time around, given the overwhelming focus for brisbane-core is
speed, speed, speed. Supporting the metadata but only enabling via
a config setting is a great idea.

Ian C.