| [01:15] <Tsmith__> test | |
| === Tsmith__ is now known as tsmith | |
| === tsmith is now known as Tsmith | |
| [01:16] <Tsmith> Alright. I have set up a bzr repository via bzr+ssh:// on a remote server. On my local box, I have grabbed a branch of that via $ bzr get. I have made a lot of changes to this branch locally and now want to update the remote repository. How do I do this? | |
| [01:16] <LeoNerd> bzr push to the same URL | |
| [01:17] <Tsmith> u know... that's actually pretty damn nice | |
| [01:17] <Tsmith> i can have revision control and have my local dev box be totally fucked and not affect the root but still get updates | |
| [01:18] <Tsmith> i've used CVS/SVN for 10 years now, but let me tell you, two days of using bzr has totally rocked my world | |
| [01:18] <Tsmith> is there a way to do bzr diff on the remote repository banch? | |
| [01:22] <Tsmith> ALRIGHT! so bzr push on local and bzr update on remote | |
| [01:22] <Tsmith> LeoNerd, thank you very much | |
| [01:39] <Peng> Tsmith: Generally, the repo on the server shouldn't have a working tree. | |
| [01:39] <Tsmith> whats that mean? | |
| [01:40] <Tsmith> > confused < | |
| [01:40] <Tsmith> i come from the SVN world | |
| [01:40] <Peng> Tsmith: You shouldn't keep a working tree on the remote side. (Bazaar branches can operate with or without one.) | |
| [01:40] <Tsmith> woah | |
| [01:40] <Peng> Tsmith: (Y'know, the working copy.) | |
| [01:41] <LeoNerd> A branch stores history. | |
| [01:41] <LeoNerd> A working copy is a checkout of some point in that history, possibly with local modifications, likely because you want to commit that as a new point in history | |
| [01:41] <Peng> Tsmith: Push to e.g. /srv/bzr/foo on the server, then if you need a working copy on the server, "bzr branch" or "bzr checkout" that location. | |
| [01:41] <Tsmith> so i think i have a "working copy" on the server in /var/bzr/sbconsultants; and i access this *remotely* via $ bzr get bzr+ssh://hopeseekr@server/var/bzr/sbconsultants | |
| [01:41] <LeoNerd> A repository on a server generally only needs the former.. Though nothing stops it having the latter as well | |
| [01:41] <Tsmith> is that right? | |
| [01:42] <Peng> Tsmith: If you really need a working copy there, you can install the push-and-update plugin. | |
| [01:42] <Tsmith> i dont want a working copy | |
| [01:42] <Tsmith> i guess i installed it really wrong | |
| [01:42] <Peng> Tsmith: No. Bazaar uses three things: the repository, which is a big bag of revision data; the branch, which is basically just a list of revisions, and the working tree. | |
| [01:43] <Peng> Tsmith: You should read the user guide or something. | |
| [01:43] <Tsmith> i started the repository on my local dev box, tar gzipped up the entire damn thing, uploaded and uncompressed on the remote server in /var/bzr, deleted my own local copy, and ran the bzr get bzr+ssh:// thing | |
| [01:43] <Tsmith> lol it seems to work tho ;) | |
| [01:44] <Peng> Tsmith: You could've just pushed instead of tarred it. | |
| [01:44] <Tsmith> are the only files on the remote server that are needed in /var/bzr/sbconsultants/.bzr? | |
| [01:45] <Tsmith> it seems there's a .bzr in every branch | |
| [01:45] <Peng> Tsmith: Anyway, to remove the working tree from a branch, run "bzr remove-tree". From the shared repo, also do "touch .bzr/repository/no-working-trees" so that new branches won't be created with working trees. | |
| [01:45] <Tsmith> alright | |
| [01:46] <Tsmith> now i have a db.php.~1~ | |
| [01:46] <Tsmith> ; is that some internal backup or important? | |
| [01:49] <Peng> Tsmith: It's a backup, made when bzr would be overwriting/deleting a file you've modified. | |
| [01:49] <Peng> Tsmith: E.g. when you run "bzr revert some-file.txt". | |
| [01:49] <Tsmith> ahhhhh | |
| [02:35] <bob2> wonder why --no-trees osn't the default | |
| [02:36] <Odd_Bloke> bob2: Because then whenever you branched while doing normal development, you'd also have to checkout. | |
| [02:36] <Odd_Bloke> Which would be inconvenient and unnecessary. | |
| [02:39] <bob2> hm, I just meant changing the default for the init-repo command | |
| [02:41] <bob2> would that still have that effect? | |
| [02:52] <jelmer> bob2: repositories are meant to be "just a storage optimization". having the behaviour of creating a working tree when creating a new branch depend on whether you are in a repository is inconsistent with that | |
| [02:55] <bob2> ahh, right | |
| [03:03] <Odd_Bloke> bob2: If you wanted to make that the default behaviour, you could use an alias. | |
| [03:03] <bob2> oh, I have | |
| [13:40] <hgr> have a feature-request for qbzr, is this the rigth place? :) | |
| [13:42] <bob2> prbably better to file a nug so it doesn/t get forgotten | |
| [13:42] <bob2> er, bug | |
| [14:55] <Warddr> What makes bazaar better then SVN? | |
| [14:56] <jelmer> Warddr, you may want to have a look at http://jam-bazaar.blogspot.com/2007/10/bazaar-vs-subversion.html | |
| [15:23] <Warddr> And how can I save a location for bazaar? Now I get this error: | |
| [15:23] <Warddr> warddr@warddr-laptop:~/ludem-ward-test$ bzr merge | |
| [15:23] <Warddr> bzr: ERROR: No location specified or remembered | |
| [15:25] <bob2> "bzr merge --remember someurl" will remember someurl | |
| [15:26] <Warddr> ty bob2, sounds logical | |
| [15:28] <Warddr> bob2, ty, it's working | |
| [16:54] <LaserJock> anybody know how to flush the disk cache from CLI? | |
| [17:00] <jelmer> LaserJock, 'sync' | |
| [17:00] <LaserJock> jelmer: ah, thanks. seems simple enough :-) | |
| [17:01] <LaserJock> seems I need to redo all my performanc tests | |
| [17:17] <nysin> I've been trying to use bzr gconflicts and it's nice and all except that it seems to save things back into foo.{BASE,THIS,OTHER} without touching the actual file in which the conflict is to be resolved. Is this the case? | |
| [17:17] <nysin> (since that's how it launches the 3rd party merge/diff viewer) | |
| === `6og is now known as Kamping_Kaiser | |
| [18:18] <LaserJock> so I'm thinking of an easy way to time a big merge on the linux tree | |
| [18:19] <LaserJock> if I put 2.6.0 into a repo, then import 2.6.25.1 | |
| [18:20] <LaserJock> then branch that, import 2.6.25.2 into the branch | |
| [18:20] <LaserJock> then finally merge that back to the main branch | |
| [18:20] <LaserJock> does that sound like a reasonable test? | |
| [18:21] <fullermd> Depends what you're testing. | |
| [18:21] <fullermd> It would merge a fair numbe of files, to be sure. But only one revision. And only on a 2-rev history. | |
| [18:22] <LaserJock> fullermd: yeah, that's for sure the weakness of my test | |
| [18:23] <fullermd> The emacs switchover is a good demonstration that vhast improvements in scaling with tree size generally don't bleed over into scaling with history size :| | |
| [18:23] <LaserJock> but I don't really want to completely convert the entire git repo into bzr and hg | |
| === bigdo5 is now known as bigdo2 | |
| [19:09] <nysin> So if bzr-gtk launches its diff3 program with only the {OTHER,BASE,THIS} filenames, is the intended workflow to perform whatever merges are desired to an arbitrarily chosen file and then copy that file over to the one actually under revision control? | |
| [22:34] <swegner> Hi all. I'm starting a new project that I'd like to have hosted on Launchpad, so I'm trying to get used to the bzr version control. When I have a group of contributors making commits, will they each need their own "branch", or is there a way to register one global "trunk" for the project's developers? | |
| [22:35] <beuno> swegner, you can have a global trunk | |
| [22:35] <beuno> just create a team | |
| [22:35] <beuno> upload the trunk to the team | |
| [22:36] <beuno> and add all the members you want to have access to that team | |
| [22:36] <swegner> that makes sense | |
| [22:36] <swegner> ok, I'm going to get started on that-- thanks for the tip :) | |
| [22:37] <beuno> swegner, np, and welcome :) | |