[16:11] <LeoNerd> How is breezy (brz) looking these days? Is there any reason I shouldn't just use it as a bzr client where previously I'd run bzr? i.e. just a different spelling...
[16:11] <LeoNerd> (that muscle memory though..)
[16:12] <Eighth_Doctor> LeoNerd: since Fedora 31, breezy provides bzr, so if you use Fedora, you don't have to change anything :)
[16:13] <Eighth_Doctor> err, Fedora 32
[16:13] <LeoNerd> debian here
[16:13] <Eighth_Doctor> (which isn't out yet, but of course, since I live on the edge, I forgot :P )
[16:13] <LeoNerd> My `bzr` is still the original bazaar
[16:14] <Eighth_Doctor> LeoNerd: you'll likely get this once bzr is ripped out of Debian with py2 removal going on now
[16:14] <LeoNerd> Righty
[17:14] <jelmer> LeoNerd: no reason not to use Breezy, though I'm possibly biased :)
[17:14] <jelmer> "bzr" in Debian unstable and testing is already Breezy
[17:15] <LeoNerd> Oh.. righty
[17:15] <LeoNerd> Ah that does clear up a confusion I had earlier, then
[17:15] <LeoNerd> I had a python2 program that wanted to import bzrlib and it didn't find it, and I was confused why bzr kept working
[17:15] <LeoNerd> Is `bzr` itself now just a trampoline for brz then?
[17:57] <jelmer> LeoNerd: yeah
[17:58] <jelmer> mostly to make the migration as seamless as possible
[17:58] <jelmer> obviously the API has changed, so not much we can do in that sense :-/
[18:02] <LeoNerd> Sure; I mostly just interact with commandline which honestly I hadn't noticed any difference on
[20:41] <fullermd> Last I looked there was a meaningful slowdown (worse with py3).  But I think my 'b' has been brz for a while too...
[20:43] <LeoNerd> Eh; any of my projects are quite small and usually the network roundtrip is the slowest part of most b{zr,rz} operations for me anyhow,.. I don't really notice the speed of the tooling overall
[20:43] <fullermd> Yep, it is (though forced to py2)
[20:43] <fullermd> The startup time is way higher.
[20:43] <LeoNerd> Ah h,,
[20:43] <LeoNerd> *hmm
[20:44] <LeoNerd> I've often wondered why more programs don't do a FastCGI-style persistent runner + lightweight wrapper setup
[20:44] <LeoNerd> make the wrapper a tiny C program that talks over a UNIX socket in $HOME
[20:45] <fullermd> I think that was the sorta idea behind 'bzr shell' or the like, once upon a time.
[20:45] <fullermd> 'd have to build it like that from the start though, or it'd be mighty hard to retrofit.  Apart from all the fiddle details about making it not blow up in fascinating ways in edge cases...
[20:45] <LeoNerd> I wouldn't like that. For me the whole point of having oneshot commandline tools is they sit right there in my normal shell with everything else
[20:46] <LeoNerd> OH. yeah.. Well for a start the moment you `cd` to somewhere else you might be in a different place
[20:46] <fullermd> Pshaw.  It's that sorta thinking that leads you to not use mh   ;p
[20:46] <LeoNerd> mh ?
[20:46] <fullermd> (well, use, I meant)
[20:46] <fullermd> The mail client, which is all individual shell commands.
[20:46] <LeoNerd> Ooh.. that one
[21:53] <jelmer> fullermd: there was a slow down because Breezy supported loading plugins from python endpoints for a while
[21:53] <jelmer> that triggered a lot of extra imports on some systems due to the way endpoints wokr