From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: VC and bzr. Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 21:34:05 -0400 Message-ID: References: <4BCF45FA.1060808@swipnet.se> <4BCFDE02.5090808@swipnet.se> <4BD01AC9.1000200@swipnet.se> <4BD0395F.7040500@swipnet.se> <87eii7629z.fsf@telefonica.net> <87aasv5zsz.fsf@telefonica.net> <87633j5ya8.fsf@telefonica.net> <871ve75t1e.fsf@telefonica.net> <83633j48mi.fsf@gnu.org> <87sk6n4733.fsf@telefonica.net> <87hbn33zd2.fsf@telefonica.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1271986554 6053 80.91.229.12 (23 Apr 2010 01:35:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2010 01:35:54 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=D3scar?= Fuentes Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 23 03:35:53 2010 connect(): No such file or directory Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O57o7-0000ba-1l for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 23 Apr 2010 03:35:51 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49723 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O57o6-0007bs-IB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 21:35:50 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1O57me-0006vJ-7X for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 21:34:20 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=55461 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O57mX-0006rK-9Y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 21:34:17 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O57mR-0007ZN-TI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 21:34:13 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.181]:23376 helo=ironport2-out.pppoe.ca) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O57mR-0007Z8-Nx for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 21:34:07 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEALWV0EvO+KoL/2dsb2JhbACcKnLBUIUPBIwA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.52,259,1270440000"; d="scan'208";a="62001446" Original-Received: from 206-248-170-11.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO ceviche.home) ([206.248.170.11]) by ironport2-out.pppoe.ca with ESMTP; 22 Apr 2010 21:34:06 -0400 Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 30B70660DC; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 21:34:06 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87hbn33zd2.fsf@telefonica.net> (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22=D3scar?= Fuentes"'s message of "Fri, 23 Apr 2010 00:18:33 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:124093 Archived-At: >>> and if that doesn't reduce the required time to something >>> reasonable, the Bazaar people have the means for fixing the >>> problem. >> I don't know what that means or if it's true. > The problem now is that bzr must operate on a remote filesystem and a > commit may require quite a bit of file I/O. > Once you have a friendly buddy on the other end, there is no reason for > a commit to a remote branch taking much more time than a local one, > being the setup of the ssh session the most expensive addition. Actually, that's not true. For a "lightweight remote checkout", the commit (even over a smart server) would be more difficult to make efficient than locally because the commit requires a potentially large transfer of data because you need to compare the new files (on one host) to the old files (on the other host). For other situations, the commit is really a commit+push, and the push is equivalent to a "pull", just done the other way around. And if you've followed Bzr development, you'll know that Bzr is not that great at doing pulls efficiently and it's unlikely to improve soon. Stefan