Re: Locks on the Bzr repository

["Jan Djärv" <jan.h.d@swipnet.se>]

Eli Zaretskii skrev 2010-08-21 11.08:
>> Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 10:36:25 +0200
>> From: Jan Djärv<jan.h.d@swipnet.se>
>> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
>>
>> Uday S Reddy skrev 2010-08-21 00.41:
>>
>>> Seems to me that you are reinforcing Stephen's point. With bound branches,
>>> your branch is locked up until the commit goes through. You can't do anything
>>> while you have uncommitted changes in your source. With unbound branches, we
>>> can continue working on the source even when push is running in the
>>> background, because the source tree doesn't have any uncommitted changes. We
>>> can also give up on the push if necessary and continue committing to the
>>> branch. The advantage seems quite clear to me.
>>
>> You are ignoring the fact that work usually doesn't happen in the bound
>> branch, but in a separate task branch.  We can continue to work there while
>> the bound branch commits.
>
> Actually, I see no reason not to continue working even in the bound
> branch that is being committed.  There's nothing at all to prevent
> that, since Bazaar takes note of the files it commits and their
> contents _before_ it sends changes upstream.  That is why you cannot
> make changes after launching "bzr ci" and hope for them to be included
> in the changeset.  (This is unlike CVS, where you could make changes
> as long as the particular file wasn't sent upstream by "cvs ci".)

This is correct.  However any bzr operation like a simple C-x v = fails 
because bzr is locked by the commit (it doesn't seem to do read-only locks). 
That is the main disadvantage that makes me go back to the task branch.

	Jan D.