Re: Locks on the Bzr repository

[Uday S Reddy <u.s.reddy@cs.bham.ac.uk>]

Jan Djärv writes:

> > You are arguing both ways, it seems to me.
> 
> I'm arguing that push doesn't buy you anything w.r.t. to speed when sending 
> changes to Savannah.  If by both ways you mean "push is slow" and "commit is 
> slow" you are correct.  We can just say "bzr is slow" and be done with it.

If you use unbound branches, push is slow but commit is not slow.
Separating push from commit helps you in that, you can do push less
often.

With bound branches, push = commit.  So, you are stuck with the
slowness.

By arguing "both ways", I mean that you want to argue that bound
branches are better.  But, when pushed, the best you can say is that
they are no worse.  Nobody has pointed out anything that makes them
better.

And the "no worse" argument only holds if you exclusively work on
separate task branches.  If you want to work on the main branch and
commit it frequently, like Eli wants to do for bug fixes, then bound
branches are worse because they force you to synchronize for each
commit. 

Cheers,
Uday