=== wgrant_ is now known as wgrant === zyga-afk is now known as zyga [06:46] mwhudson, ? [06:46] mwhudson, some paste [07:00] morning [07:03] co-located branches doc (http://doc.bazaar.canonical.com/developers/colocated-branches.html) lists few 'use cases' (http://doc.bazaar.canonical.com/developers/colocated-branches.html#use-cases) and i'm not sure whether co-located branches are real need in bzr (yesterday i played with --lightweight checkouts used for feature branches based on shared repo) or is it more of filling the gap to hg/git's features? [07:14] gour: they are more convenient than lightweight checkouts + branchless repo, and just as good for many cases, so that's a pretty valuable improvement [07:15] spiv: i see...thanks...are they going to be ready for 2.6? [07:17] They're already ready in 2.5: http://doc.bazaar.canonical.com/bzr.2.5/en/whats-new/whats-new-in-2.5.html#basic-colocated-branch-support [07:17] No doubt they'll be even better in 2.6 :) [07:19] iirc, jelmer or someone else was speaking something about UI not polished (yet)...otoh, i was not aware they're already in...does it mean we should (try) to adopt 'em instead of lightweight co-s & branchless repos? [07:19] I'd give it go, yes. [07:19] ok [07:20] If you don't like them for some reason you can always change your mind later and use lightweight checkouts and boring old branches in treeless repo, etc :) [07:21] :-) [07:23] in some use cases, i like treeless repo and lw co-s...eg. i'm using weechat irc client and my ~/.weechat is lightweight co keeping track of weechat's config files, while the treeless repo is in ~/repos [07:27] hmm, colocated branches need new format...we just talked about bzr's formats yesterday :-) [07:29] 2.6 docs when speaking about colocated branches uses future tense, so wondering what's avaialable today... [07:39] suspect once you get used to them you'll want to use colocated all the time [07:42] bob2: well, it's not especially well-suited for the .dotfiles use case mentioned above. [07:43] But for general code hacking, yeha. [07:44] gour: huh? [07:44] gour: colocated branches need a new format? [07:47] jelmer: bzr init -h ==> --development-colo The 2a format with experimental support for colocated [07:48] branches. [07:49] or it means something else i'm not aware of? [07:50] gour: the development-colo format isn't necessary for colocated branches anymore [07:50] gour: you can just use them with 2a these days [07:51] jelmer: hmm, it seems that docs needs some love then ;) [07:51] gour: which docs? [07:53] jelmer: bzr-2.5.1 help text for 'init' command [08:00] morning! [08:03] hey mgz [08:03] gour: ah, but I guess it's listed under the development formats still? [08:07] jelmer: well, it's listed under branch format section along with --2a etc., iow. valid option for 'init' in 2.5.1 [08:09] gour: sure, but there's lots of other uninteresting formats there too [08:09] *development [08:09] though we should probably hide development-colo [08:14] * gour nods [12:44] do I need to register a launchpad account in order to just clone (branch?) a repository? [12:44] anddam: no, you can clone a branch (as long as it's not private) without an account [12:45] jelmer: do I need to init a repo before running bzr branch? [12:46] anddam: no, see the mini tutorial [12:46] http://doc.bazaar.canonical.com/latest/en/mini-tutorial/ [12:46] I tried both, "bzr branch lp:foo" and "mkdir foo; cd foo; bzr init; bzr branch lp:foo" [12:46] k [12:46] I just read that [12:46] it shows how to init-repo and init but it doesn't says it that's *mandatory* or not [12:47] with git a "git clone" would create the local repository as well [12:48] anddam: in bzr the repository is created if a shared one doesn't exist too [12:48] I'm trying cloning lp:groundhog [12:48] I get bzr: ERROR: Not a branch: "http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~juanjux/groundhog/groundhog-juanjo/" [12:49] when running "bzr branch lp:groundhog", is that an issue on my side or not? [12:49] anddam: that branch doesn't really exist - it's never been pushed to according to the web page [12:49] sounds like it isn't [12:49] I see [12:50] Recent revisions [12:50] This branch has not been pushed to yet. [12:50] so the launchpad repository for the project is empty, isn't it? [12:50] it doesn't actually have a control directory I think [12:51] so it's not even empty [12:51] I apologize but I'm really new to bzr [12:51] idk what a control directory is [12:51] the point is that lp:groundhog has no code, is this correct? [12:51] it's the same thing as ".git" in git [12:52] I mean, in git the control directory is named ".git" [12:52] anddam: yes, lp:groundhog doesn't have any code [12:52] I see lp:~juanjux/groundhog/trunk is listed as branch and that has code [12:52] is there any difference between a subdir in user space or a root level project? [12:53] I mean is that just a convention, a matter of taste or so? [12:53] (fetching) [13:00] anddam: I'm not sure I follow [13:00] anddam: subdir in user space? [13:04] jelmer: yes, ~juanjux/groundhog rather than groundhog [13:05] anddam: ah, that's just convention [13:11] thx [13:11] bye [13:38] vila: Could you please review https://code.launchpad.net/~abentley/bzr/config-branchname/+merge/110825 ? === zyga is now known as zyga-afk === zyga-afk is now known as zyga [14:51] jam: Changing branchname to fall back to basename is a 1-line change, and I'm happy to do that. Maybe rename to "shortname". But you're not proposing we remove "basename", right? So we'd still be introducing a new variable. [14:51] abentley: I'm fine with a new var, what I want is to have 1 var that can just be used, without needing to think "do I need X or Y in this case" [14:52] jam: Okay. Does "shortname" work? ("branchshortname" seems...long) [14:53] branchname is fine for me [14:53] I think I prefer that [14:55] jam: "branchname" was meant to refer to the colocated branch terminology. jelmer, is it cool if I introduce a config var called "branchname" that is ",branch=$NAME" but falls back to "parent/$NAME"? === zyga is now known as zyga-afk [17:55] Have we got a bug for `bzr config --remove launchpad_username` not working on 2.5.1? [17:56] needs --scope=bazaar [20:33] /q === pjdc_ is now known as pjdc