Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Bazaar 1.3 preview

[David Allouche]

On Fri, 2005-04-01 at 01:09 +0000, Mikhael Goikhman wrote:
> I didn't try baz 1.3 preview, but I would like to know about the status
> of several issues.
> 
> 1) Don't you think "tree-id" command is misnamed? Use "tree-rev" name
> if you feel "tree-revision" is not short enough (I don't feel so).

I concur.

> 
> 2) The flat-revision subdirectory structure in ~/.arch-cache leads to
> huge directories, this is not scalable. Is not version/patchlevel
> structure more balanced and more consistent?

I agree, the arch-cache hierarchy should use versions containership
because:

      * the cache hierarchy groups revisions by archive names, so there
        is already a coupling with the namespace hierarchy.
      * just grouping revisions by archives leads to too big
        directories, that's not a good use filesystem storage.

Baz hackers?
-- 
                                                            -- ddaa

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part