[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: arch commit on large trees ?

From: John A Meinel
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: arch commit on large trees ?
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 12:37:54 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Macintosh/20050716)

Philippe Moutarlier wrote:
>>$ tla my-revision-library
> /usr/home/philippe/tla-rev-library/
> I know that the system knows about the library because I could do a
> tla library-add of a specific revision with no problem.
> I am not sure I understand the "centralized" notion of rev libraries in
> the context of decentralized development. What I want to get is a
> (easy .?) way to maintain a "mobile" branch of a project that I can
> merge every once in a while with other branches of the same project.
> This what I am trying now. I branched a project on my laptop and try to
> modify/commit on it. This what takes so long.

A revlib is just a local cache. Nothing goes into there that you can't
delete and get back somehow. Basically it is just a complete checkout of
any tree which you try to access, so that in the future, it can just go
back and access it again rather than downloading it/patching another
tree to get it.

What you need is a local "archive". Which is where the patches go. You
have branches inside an archive.

> Then I need to maintain my mobile, decentralized, rev lib, right ?

So basically you will have an archive that everyone shares/can access.
And another archive on your laptop.
You do most of your work locally, committing locally, and then when you
want to make it public (which may not be visible to the whole world),
you can merge the changes into the other archive.

So on SERVER_MACHINE, you would have
And on your laptop you would have

There are a few ways to configure this, but something like the above I
think is pretty common.

> Also, I am using tla, should I try bazaar instead ? Any major
> differences ?

About 2 man years of shared development effort. :) Tom was pretty
picky/slow (in some places reasonably so trying to be a stable tree to
baz being a dev tree) in merging other people's work. (Sometimes just a
 little (very) slow).

There are things like "baz status" is prefered to "baz changes". In the
latest dev code, rbrowse was promoted to just "browse", and abrowse

Baz has a lot of work done for extra caching, so that it needs to do
round trips less often.

I maintain a semi-official cygwin port of baz, though I have older tla
ports, I don't do much with them anymore.

Tom has officially resigned as Gnu Arch frontman, passing the torch to
Canonical and Bazaar. So there probably won't be much future work going
into tla, unless someone really likes the codebase.

Bazaar will also let you transition to bazaar-ng (bzr) after a while,
which is trying to learn from all the little problems encountered so
far. This is as in months, not years, but not necessarily right now
either. If you want to give it a shot, bzr handles your working offline
a little bit better already, though it is still a little rough around
the edges/unoptimized for certain cases. (

> Thanks,
> Philippe


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]