[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Switching to bzr: what Emacs developers should know?
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
Re: Switching to bzr: what Emacs developers should know? |
Date: |
Thu, 13 Aug 2009 12:31:56 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.50 (gnu/linux) |
> 100%[======================================>] 233,333,654 1.90M/s in 66s
> 100%[======================================>] 230,333,027 3.65M/s in 77s
^^^^^^^
LOL
> bzr branch bzr://... ==> 47 minutes
> bzr branch http://... ==> 10 minutes
> wget http:/.../{gz,lzma} ==> 1 minute
If you couple that with the measurement for "bzr branch" locally between
two separate repositories, maybe the Bzr guys will be interested to look
at it. I think they already know about those performance problems, but
it's always good to remind them that they're still not solved
(especially the bulk transfer over `bzr' SHOULD be at least as fast
as over http).
> $ wget http://bzr.savanna.gnu.org/.../emacs-shared-repos.gz
> $ tar zxvf emacs-shared-repos.gz
> $ cd emacs-shared-repos (or whatever it's called)
> $ cd trunk
> $ bzr pull (pull down new revs into trunk)
> $ bzr branch trunk my-branch (start working by branching trunk)
> Seem sane to you?
Yes, of course. Not just to save download time, but also because it
then automatically sets up a shared repository, which is the sanest way
to work with Bzr, in my experience.
Stefan
PS: Seeing that there's virtually no size difference between
emacs-testing.tar.gz and emacs-testing.tar.lzma, I don't se the need to
keep them both. And I also wonder if emacs-testing.tar wouldn't work
just as well.