capistrano isn't designed for dscm's. When I say space is cheap i mean when you use remote-cache method. This is what I use. It only pushes up the *new* changesets to a "cache" copy and then cap will copy this folder. So yes it is space inefficient but it is very efficient network-wise.
Matthew Elder Technical Lead 661-343-7955 [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Sep 24, 2007, at 12:37 AM, Izidor Jerebic wrote: > > > On 24.9.2007, at 0:01, Matthew Elder wrote: >> >> Space is cheap, programming time is expensive, that was my >> rationale :) >> >> Fix mercurial not cap! > > Well, mercurial is distributed SCM, so the workflow is different than > subversion. Repositories are mostly local (or can be made so by > simple filecopy), so local checkout and copy-to-remote should be the > mostly used deployment, I guess. There is little need for remote > repository support. And when you do local export and copy over > network, it does matter a lot if there is 1 MB or 4 MB to copy. It's > not space, it's time. > > I do not care if it is supported or not, because I fixed it and it > works for me. But the reasoning is flawed. This is not subversion > with central remote repository. This is mercurial with local > directory, which doubles as a repository. Intentionally disabling > support for local repositories because remote don't work is IMHO not > the right way. The main point of distributed scm is local repository, > isn't it? > > izidor > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/capistrano -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
