Re: [Gnu-arch-users] losing pristine trees? Slowdown for network archives...

[Paul Hedderly]

On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 11:05:37AM -0700, Tom Lord wrote:
> 
> No.  The idea is not to eliminate having a locally-cached copy of a
> known-good immediate ancestor -- just to eliminate (at least
> optionally) having it in {arch}.

Yea I grok that...

> You indirectly raise a good requirement for proposed caching
> algorithms that I left out:  

Which I think I was trying to raise directly;

> Suppose I get from some (say, remote) archive.   Currently,
> `what-changed' works thereafter, always, without needing to recontact
> that archive.   This remains true even if I rename the project-tree I
> created with `get'.

My point was that if there is no pristine tree (in the local {arch})
then what-changed is going to have to compare with a revlib in the
archive (which could be over a distant network).

This raises a) that network may not be available. So I can't commit or
update anyway, but I can no longer what-changed, undo/redo etc.
b) commands like what-changed, undo, redo and anything that depend on
those are going to be much slower.

Just say if I clearly don't understand :O)

--
Paul