On 15 March 2011 08:59, Michael Hope michael.hope@linaro.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 12:12 AM, Richard Sandiford richard.sandiford@linaro.org wrote:
Short story is that we have a better tool than svn, so feature branches may make some use cases overall easier and more transparent.
Well, as you say, the size of GCC and its history is pushing the limits of bzr a bit. For bug-fixing and committing, I actually find quilt+svn to be a fair bit more productive than bzr, and that's even with Andrew doing the heavy work on merging.
I did some quick benchmarks. No comment either way: bzr pull - took 4:06 to pull down and merge a few changes bzr branch 4.5 lp-foo - took 4:35 bzr commit - took 3:08 for a one line change bzr send (puts the delta in a mail message) - took 10:20 bzr merge - took 3:08 for the one-line change into trunk
For big trees, I would really recommend you try out 'bzr-colo', which makes it easier to reuse the same working tree across multiple branches. 'bzr colo-branch lp-foo' should be pretty fast, and won't need to create a whole new tree. merge etc may be faster too.
http://doc.bazaar.canonical.com/plugins/en/colo-plugin.html