From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Uday S Reddy Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Locks on the Bzr repository Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 10:38:46 +0100 Message-ID: <19567.40614.937000.714861@gargle.gargle.HOWL> References: <4C6D56DB.7040703@swipnet.se> <4C6D8EC5.7040901@swipnet.se> <4C6E1F0A.7070506@swipnet.se> <837hjlr78p.fsf@gnu.org> <87zkwhtws5.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <83tymppj62.fsf@gnu.org> <871v9t8klf.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <83lj81pazq.fsf@gnu.org> <4C6F9009.3030105@swipnet.se> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1282383572 11909 80.91.229.12 (21 Aug 2010 09:39:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 09:39:32 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Uday S Reddy , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Jan =?iso-8859-1?Q?Dj=E4rv?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Aug 21 11:39:29 2010 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 1OmkXu-00079X-Nf for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 11:39:27 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40231 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OmkXt-0003fr-U1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 05:39:25 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=45064 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OmkXl-0003fg-GT for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 05:39:18 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OmkXk-00014M-Cl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 05:39:17 -0400 Original-Received: from sun61.bham.ac.uk ([147.188.128.150]:54041) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OmkXk-000141-7Y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 05:39:16 -0400 Original-Received: from [147.188.128.127] (helo=bham.ac.uk) by sun61.bham.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1OmkXf-0003ME-PS; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 10:39:11 +0100 Original-Received: from mx1.cs.bham.ac.uk ([147.188.192.53]) by bham.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OmkXf-0002y7-Fa; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 10:39:11 +0100 Original-Received: from gromit.cs.bham.ac.uk ([147.188.193.16] helo=MARUTI.cs.bham.ac.uk) by mx1.cs.bham.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.51) id 1OmkXf-0007kv-Lf; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 10:39:11 +0100 Original-Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel In-Reply-To: <4C6F9009.3030105@swipnet.se> X-Mailer: VM 8.1.92a under 23.2.1 [EmacsW32 Version 1.58 2010-08-02] (i386-mingw-nt5.1.2600) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) 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:128948 Archived-At: Jan Dj=E4rv writes: > You are ignoring the fact that work usually doesn't happen in the bou= nd=20 > branch, but in a separate task branch. We can continue to work there= while=20 > the bound branch commits. I don't see much difference. If there isn't "much difference" then why is push being discouraged=3F You are arguing both ways, it seems to me. If you use separate task branches then, yes, it doesn't make any difference whether you use a bound branch or unbound. So, there is no reason to prefer one over the other. If you want to work on the main branch rather than task branches, then it does make an important difference, as Stephen and I have pointed out. Here, an unbound main branch is a lot more flexible and it will reduce the contention on the central repo. But this part of the thread is in reponse to Eli's post on the 20th, especially his comment: Eli Zaretskii writes: > Plus, pushing many unrelated commits has a drawback as not showing in= > "bzr log" unless you also use the --include-merges (or -n0) switch, > which makes "bzr log" significantly slower. If Eli is trying to avoid levels in histories, then he *must be* working on the main branch. And, he is stung by the bound main branch. Using an unbound main branch will immediately improve things. Note that he also raised a logical problem. If you open a separate branch for your work, then you don't want to put many unrelated commits in it. That will make it appear as if they were related commits at the top level. Using bound branches will encourage people to put unrelated commits in task branches. Whichever way I look at it, I don't see any upside to using bound branches, but plenty of downside. So, I am surprised that emacs-devs choose this mode of operation. Cheers, Uday