[Gnu-arch-users] Re: Future of GNU Arch, bazaar and bazaar-ng ... ?

[Matthieu Moy]

Robert Collins <address@hidden> writes:

> On Sat, 2005-08-20 at 23:01 +0200, Matthieu Moy wrote:
>> 1) The namespace change (making a/c--b--v optional). If this makes its
>>    way into bazaar, I guess this will have an influence on front-ends
>>    in particular. Actually, I think this idea should be dropped given
>>    the new Bazaar<->Bazaar-NG situation.
>
> To do this in the baz C code base would take a lot of effort. With the
> plan to release bazaar-ng as Baz 2, I'm not planning on coding on the
> namespace stuff in the C code base. I don't think it would make sense
> for a volunteer to do this either.

Fine. This has a small consequence: Some of the code I've introduced
in baz 1.5 was written with a future change of the namespace in mind
(i.e. not trying to access branches and categories individually), and
could be adapted (you may have followed the thread about the
deprecation of abrowse).

Two examples:

baz browse (and other commands having --tree-view) output something
like this:

address@hidden
  authinfo--main--0
    base-0 ... patch-2
  bazaar--a-test-for-file-history--1.5
    base-0 ... patch-2
  bazaar--abrowse-deprecated--1.5
    base-0 ... patch-9
  bazaar--archive-mirror--1.4
    base-0 ... patch-1
[...]

Then we could change this to

address@hidden
  authinfo
    authinfo--main
      authinfo--main--0
        base-0 ... patch-2
  bazaar
    bazaar--a-test-for-file-history
      bazaar--a-test-for-file-history--1.5
        base-0 ... patch-2
    bazaar--abrowse-deprecated
      bazaar--abrowse-deprecated--1.5
        base-0 ... patch-9


The other one is the LIMIT argument to "browse", which is currently a
prefix string match. It could be a category/branch/version match.

In short, browse could look more like abrowse (perhaps --categories
and --branches can be re-added too).

I think my decisions made sense while preparing a transition, but not
anymore. I'll try to implement this next week-end.

>> 2) The cached-inventory system. Since, as I understand it, Robert
>>    started working on this, and it could really improve the
>>    performance, that may be a good thing to get it in Bazaar.
>
> I am planning to get this finished off and into baz 1.5, but we'll see
> if its stable enough once I get back to .au.

We discussed about several ways to do so, on of them being a "new
mechanism", partly breaking compatibility, and the other being a cache
system fully compatible with baz 1.4. I think it's better to avoid the
"new mechanism" version.

Thanks for the clarifications.

-- 
Matthieu