Am Fri, 28 May 2010 12:42:01 +0200 schrieb Bernd Eilers <[email protected]>:
> If you would do such a 'remote pull' for a new milestone on the > remote cws hg repository wouldn´t you than need to pull these changes > done on that remote cws hg repository into your local hg repository > afterwards before you can than push your own changes in order to > resolve merge conflicts and to not create two mercurial heads on the > remote hg repository and wouldn´t that mean that in fact nothing is > gained at all? No. Without a "remote pull" you have to: - pull from DEV300 to local (all master changes) - merge local - push from local to remote cws (all master changes and merge changes) With a "remote pull" you have to: - pull from DEV300 to local (all master changesets) - "remote pull" (actually just hardlinking on hg.services...) - merge local - push from local to remote cws (_JUST_ merge changesets) Given the size of changes on the master there is a lot of bandwidth (and storage on the hg.services... server) to be saved. The gain is again multiplied if devs have multiple local cws and a prestine local DEV300 copy. In that case the step: - pull from DEV300 to local (all master changes) is only performed once and not once per cws (local pulls dont cost bandwidth or storage), so the whole cost of the resync is in the: - push from local to remote cws step. And most of the transmitted changesets (the master changesets) are already on the remote site (in the DEV300, but not yet in the cws repo). BR, Bjoern --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
