From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Locks on the Bzr repository Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 18:36:15 +0300 Message-ID: <83y6c0nfkg.fsf@gnu.org> 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> <19567.40614.937000.714861@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <4C6FAC79.1070406@swipnet.se> <19567.52186.156000.312231@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1282404871 8489 80.91.229.12 (21 Aug 2010 15:34:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 15:34:31 +0000 (UTC) Cc: u.s.reddy@cs.bham.ac.uk, jan.h.d@swipnet.se, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Uday S Reddy Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Aug 21 17:34:29 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 1Omq5T-0002za-Iu for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 17:34:27 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58790 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Omq5S-0003N9-O3 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 11:34:26 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=36181 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Omq5L-0003Lj-Qy for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 11:34:20 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Omq5K-0003Ww-Lo for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 11:34:19 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]:54305) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Omq5K-0003Wg-FW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 11:34:18 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0L7I00100DVYA700@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 18:34:14 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.127.220.100]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0L7I00M85DX0BCT0@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 18:34:14 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: <19567.52186.156000.312231@gargle.gargle.HOWL> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il 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:128971 Archived-At: > Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 13:51:38 +0100 > From: Uday S Reddy > Cc: Uday S Reddy , emacs-devel@gnu.org > > 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. The only advantage of a bound branch is that the workflow is simpler. > 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. You cannot push without synchronizing anyway, or else you will mess up the upstream history.