On Thu, 08 Sep 2005 18:51:51 +0200, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
> Aaron Bentley wrote:
>
>> Ironically, one of the reasons we started requiring 2.4 (we previously
>> required 2.3) was that 2.4 has the subprocess module, which makes
>> crossplatform compatibility a lot better.
>
> the subprocess module
On Thu, 08 Sep 2005 17:44:36 +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 05:14:17PM -0700, Thomas Lord wrote:
>> Arch was forked because I declined an offer for employment from
>> Canonical because I found the details of the offer to be obnoxious.
>
> I'm rather curious about those de
On 8/21/05, Jan Hudec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> To state a more precise definition, Bazaar-NG only allows one head in
> a given tree (each working copy is a branch and vice versa, so I'll call it
> together a tree) at any given time. So if what you pull is descendant of your
> current head, you
On 8/21/05, Jan Hudec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks for the clarification.
>
> So it behaves similarly to git and mercurial (and monotone),
That's correct.
> except mercurial
> (but not git) will not insist on merging immediately.
Yes. The default behaviour of bzr is meant to be more f
On 8/21/05, John A Meinel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just as a point of clarification, bazaar-ng (bzr) is actually snapshot
> centric, rather than patch-centric.
> It does similar hashing for everything. But it associates a unique
> identifier to each hash, rather than using the hash as the iden
On 21 Jun 2005, Miles Bader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 6/21/05, Aaron Bentley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I guess the thing I like about the current output format for bzr is that
> > it's more accessible to new users, because they don't have to read a
> > legend to decipher it.
>
> Uh-oh..
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 15:40:55 -0800, Tom Lord wrote:
> Speaking of which
>
> I'm intensely interested in bazaar-ng but my forays into the available
> writings about it haven't given me a really comfortable grip on what the
> vision is there. Bits and pieces of ideas sound good but I didn't ge
On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 11:21:19 -0500, Deliverable Mail wrote:
> Now, if I use a laptop and simply want two full repos with all
> histories on both and sync them when I get a chance to, e.g. if I work
> on a big screen at home and on my laptop in a cafe, -- why do I need
> the second layer? What is
