Re: Locks on the Bzr repository

[Óscar Fuentes]

Uday S Reddy <address@hidden> writes:

>> Not really (for the workflow advertised by Stephen and Karl.)
>
> "Stephen" is Stephen Turnbull?

Yes.

> But he is arguing for unbound branches now.

I'm not sure what he is arguing for, because I didn't follow the
thread.

The workflow he described on the wiki page makes lots of sense and was
great to know before too much people learned the hard way why other
apparently reasonable workflows are flawed.

[snip]

> Given the situation, moving to git would seem like a good idea,
> because its rebase is trustworthy and should improve matters
> enormously.

Bzr was chosen not because technical merits, but because political
reasons (it is a GNU project.) I don't see Emacs moving to Git anytime
soon, no matter how much bzr sucks.