|
From: | Jan Djärv |
Subject: | Re: Locks on the Bzr repository |
Date: | Sat, 21 Aug 2010 15:02:53 +0200 |
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 |
Uday S Reddy skrev 2010-08-21 14.51:
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.
Duh. I'm only talking about when stuff goes to Savannah. I know committing locally is much faster, I do it all the time.
Separating push from commit helps you in that, you can do push less often.
No it don't. When a bug fix is done, or a feature is done, I want it to go to Savannah. Push doesn't help here, when it is time, it is time.
By arguing "both ways", I mean that you want to argue that bound branches are better.
You are putting words in my mouth. I only said for the same amount of data to be sent upstream, push and commit is equally slow.
Jan D.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |