Minimum Bzr Version

Matt Rogers mattr at
Mon Jan 11 21:31:46 UTC 2010

On Monday 11 January 2010 15:12:55 you wrote:
> 	Hey folks. So the bzr repository is almost ready (yay)! :-)
> 	There's one question that we want to pose to the group, though, before
> we start the migration process: What's the highest-acceptable minimum
> version of bzr for you?
> 	Here's why this is a question:
> 	As bzr has evolved, they have developed better and better in-disk
> formats for the repositories. In 0.92 (a very old version), they
> standardized on a format called "pack" as the default. It's nice, but
> there are *significant* speed advantages to the more modern formats,
> which are numbered along with the versions in which they were
> introduced: 1.9, 1.14, and 2.0. (The only difference is in speed--the
> functionality of bzr is identical with each format.)
> 	2.0 is definitely the best--it shows really large differences for
> checking out, branching, committing, doing a diff, log, etc.--almost all
> the common commands, and it makes a real difference in everyday usage,
> in my experience.
> 	The only problem is that 2.0 is really new (September 21, 2009). It
> doesn't have any newer or different Python requirements than older
> versions, though, so any system that can run any older version can run
> the new version--it just might not be available from your standard
> package repository.
> 	So what LpSolit proposed (and I think is a good idea) is that we say
> this: If you want to commit to bzr, you should install 2.0. If you can't
> install 2.0, we will continue to mirror bzr back to CVS, and you can use
> CVS to do read-only access to the Bugzilla code base.
> 	Does that sound good to everybody, or would you rather require an older
> bzr version at the expense of some performance?
> 	-Max

Whatever gives us as developers the best performance is what we should go for, 

More information about the developers mailing list