From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sean Subject: Re: VCS comparison table Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2006 09:28:45 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20061021130111.GL75501@over-yonder.net> <87ac3p1jn7.wl%cworth@cworth.org> <1161472030.9241.174.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20061021192539.4a00cc3e.seanlkml@sympatico.ca> <1161478005.9241.210.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20061021212645.2f9ba751.seanlkml@sympatico.ca> <1161487417.9241.220.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20061021233014.d4525a1d.seanlkml@sympatico.ca> <20061022100028.GQ75501@over-yonder.net> <20061022074422.50dcbee6.seanlkml@sympatico.ca> <20061022130322.GS75501@over-yonder.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: bazaar-ng@lists.canonical.com, git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Oct 22 15:28:51 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GbdNi-00055a-R3 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sun, 22 Oct 2006 15:28:51 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750896AbWJVN2s (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Oct 2006 09:28:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750899AbWJVN2s (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Oct 2006 09:28:48 -0400 Received: from bayc1-pasmtp01.bayc1.hotmail.com ([65.54.191.161]:3396 "EHLO bayc1-pasmtp01.bayc1.hotmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750896AbWJVN2r (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Oct 2006 09:28:47 -0400 X-Originating-IP: [65.93.43.81] X-Originating-Email: [seanlkml@sympatico.ca] Received: from linux1.attic.local ([65.93.43.81]) by bayc1-pasmtp01.bayc1.hotmail.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Sun, 22 Oct 2006 06:28:46 -0700 Received: from guru.attic.local ([10.10.10.28]) by linux1.attic.local with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GbcRZ-0000xj-Eq; Sun, 22 Oct 2006 08:28:45 -0400 To: "Matthew D. Fuller" Message-Id: <20061022092845.233deb43.seanlkml@sympatico.ca> In-Reply-To: <20061022130322.GS75501@over-yonder.net> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.9 (GTK+ 2.10.4; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Oct 2006 13:28:46.0794 (UTC) FILETIME=[0094E2A0:01C6F5DE] Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 08:03:22 -0500 "Matthew D. Fuller" wrote: > Perhaps the difference is that we're making a [fine] distinction > between "useful in a truely distributed system" and "useful when > WORKING in a truely distributed system". cworth's point back up a few > posts is good; nearly all of my use of revnos is in direct interaction > with the tool, where the revnos just came from looking at the history. > And of those uses that aren't in that class, nearly all of THOSE are > very transient. Non-local (in time or space) stability in either of > those cases is a total non-concern. Sure, but if they're just a local feature then why propagate them with the distributed data? If they're meant only to be used locally, they can be guaranteed to be stable by never replicating them, with obvious benefits for the local user. However bzr makes the (IMO) mistake of including them in the data that is distributed between repos. This suggests bzr team just doesn't care about the distributed models where this will not help and will quite possibly lead to frustration and confusion. And yes, I know that you haven't seen those situations yourself yet. Obviously, it's the Bzr teams trade-off to make, but if an avid user like yourself thinks of revno's as local, perhaps they've made the wrong choice. Sean