From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jan_Dj=E4rv?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Locks on the Bzr repository Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 12:30:44 +0200 Message-ID: <4C6FAAD4.7080905@swipnet.se> 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> <838w40pc3q.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1282386682 20382 80.91.229.12 (21 Aug 2010 10:31:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 10:31:22 +0000 (UTC) Cc: u.s.reddy@cs.bham.ac.uk, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Aug 21 12:31:21 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 1OmlLu-0004su-3y for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 12:31:19 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35900 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OmlLm-0000KY-Up for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 06:30:59 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=57485 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OmlLf-0000K1-Bf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 06:30:52 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OmlLe-0007sl-3Z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 06:30:51 -0400 Original-Received: from smtprelay-h32.telenor.se ([213.150.131.5]:59109) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OmlLc-0007s5-Ii; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 06:30:48 -0400 Original-Received: from ipb1.telenor.se (ipb1.telenor.se [195.54.127.164]) by smtprelay-h32.telenor.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49674E9232; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 12:30:46 +0200 (CEST) X-SENDER-IP: [85.225.45.35] X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ArI1AP9Hb0xV4S0jPGdsb2JhbACHaphVDAEBAQE1LbcbgnCCRwQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.56,245,1280700000"; d="scan'208";a="122145089" Original-Received: from c-232de155.25-1-64736c10.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se (HELO coolsville.localdomain) ([85.225.45.35]) by ipb1.telenor.se with ESMTP; 21 Aug 2010 12:30:46 +0200 Original-Received: from [172.20.199.13] (zeplin [172.20.199.13]) by coolsville.localdomain (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 157F97FA05A; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 12:30:45 +0200 (CEST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; sv-SE; rv:1.9.2.8) Gecko/20100802 Thunderbird/3.1.2 In-Reply-To: <838w40pc3q.fsf@gnu.org> 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:128950 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii skrev 2010-08-21 11.08: >> Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 10:36:25 +0200 >> From: Jan Dj=E4rv >> 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 bran= ches, >>> 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 branc= hes, we >>> can continue working on the source even when push is running in the >>> background, because the source tree doesn't have any uncommitted chan= ges. 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 boun= d >> 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 =3D fails= =20 because bzr is locked by the commit (it doesn't seem to do read-only lock= s).=20 That is the main disadvantage that makes me go back to the task branch. Jan D.