Hi Christian,
On Sun, 30 Aug 2009, Christian Lohmaier wrote:
download cannot be faster than your physical connection
Sure. But if something on the way or on the server limits transfer,
multiple connections can speed it up.
you're afraid of connection losses, then your line is probably not that
fast...
I have DSL 3000 here. That is slow, and the longer the transfer takes, the
more likely it is that the connection will get a hickup.
cloning via hg directly is not that bad IMHO. (Yes, if your connection
is flakey, you want something that can be resumed, but that by itself
doesn't make a tarball more suitable)
I can't see why a tarball should not be suitable here - of course any
other single file will do as well, e.g. a 'hg bundle' output, the transfer
just has to be resumable. However my impression was that 'hg bundle' takes
much more time to generate and unpack as a simple tarball.
A 'bundle' only makes sense when you need to update an already existing
non-empty repo with a bunch of changesets; in this case tarballs of course
cannot be used anymore.
One can initialize an emtpy repo and then use a sequence of 'hg pull -r
<rev>' commands where the <rev> is then increased by a lower number of
changesets.
/that/ is inefficient and takes longer and will transfer more data than
a real clone.
Might be, but it's the only safe way as long as there is no resumable
single file transfer available.
You can use the tags as well - starting from DEV300_m31 in the pilot
repo.
Good idea.
Yes, definitely you should base your cws on a locally available clone of
the repo. Not sure where you got the idea that cloning a cws is a good
thing to do.
Well, most likely because it's the Mercurial standard way to handle things
you've got those separate CWS repos here (with Git you would probably only
have one). A beginner could easily fall into this pit and 'clone' the DEV
and some CWS separately.
The only thing to pay attention to is that a hg pull doesn't switch the
default tree to the location/version you pulled from if there were no
changes.
Right. At least one can 'hg update' when it is known which CWS is at which
head.
If working on such a clone, the only thing to remember is: specify tip
as your revision to hg push, otherwise it would push the changesets from
all the other cws and the main-repo in addition to your changes to the
cws.
Yep. There should be a switch to change the 'push' default behaviour so
that only the branch one is currently on is pushed.
Regards
Guido
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
