treeless branches + lightweight co-s or colocated branches

[Mark Grandi]

How is this different then having a shared repository locally with
different branches inside of it? Just the fact that you don't have the
entire history / don't need a shared repository?

On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 1:09 AM, John Arbash Meinel
<john at arbash-meinel.com>wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 6/19/2012 9:47 AM, Gour wrote:
> ...
>
>
> > It's very nice setup and now we use e.g. treeless repo +
> > lightweight checkouts for a running programs to keep their config
> > data under dvcs, but having repo in the other place.
> >
> > Now, I wonder how does this setup (treeless branches + switching
> > lightweight checkouts compare with colocated branches?
> >
> > Any pro/cons?
> >
>
> Personally, treeless repo + lightweight checkouts is an ideal workflow
> for me.
>
> The main benefit is flexibility. You can have multiple checkouts
> pointing at the same 'farm' of branches. I use this a lot if
> developing multiple features. You can have switched to a new feature
> and are not ready to commit, but another one got a review and needs a
> tweak before submitting it.
>
> Main downside is that it is not the default setup, and it isn't really
> easy to have a simple "set up my work in this manner". You need a
> place for the repo (which is pretty user specific), and then a place
> for the trees (also user specific), etc.
>
> > First thing I notice that the latter requires using new storage
> > format and second, I see that 2.6 docs
> > (http://doc.bazaar.canonical.com/developers/colocated-branches.html)
> > use future tense in several places, so we wonder how much is the
> > 'colocated branches' feature complete in the current bzr and what
> > to expect in 2.6?
> >
> > Is bzr-colo plugin obsolete now?
> >
> >
> > Sincerely, Gour
> >
>
> It doesn't change the storage format, and the branches and structure
> is actually backwards compatible. (older bzr can commit/pull/push/etc
> in a colo setup, it just doesn't know how to switch to individual
> branches, etc.)
>
> John
> =:->
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAk/hhSsACgkQJdeBCYSNAAMNTACcDf1bI2uEhBCBu7PoSO4U5WSz
> IGQAn1eeC8NJDHhEr6yjNE3G69bYa0kg
> =otCC
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20120620/e73549af/attachment.html>