Are read-only stores a bug?

Martin Pool mbp at
Mon Jun 20 01:02:59 BST 2005

On 19 Jun 2005, Aaron Bentley < at> wrote:

> But I can't use rm -R to delete them.  Not sanely anyway, because there
> are two readonly files for each revision, and one readonly file for
> every set of contents a file's ever had.  So rm -Rf it is.
> But rm -Rf is a really bad thing to commit to muscle memory.  Only a few
> commands come to mind as more dangerous (dd for example).

That's a good point, and I've run into the same thing.  I had made the
store entries readonly because I was thinking about hardlinking them
into the tree, but that's not done now, and probably not likely to
happen soon.  So it's probably better not to make them so.

> If we wanted to keep the stores readonly, I suppose we could have a "bzr
> unbranch" command that would only delete bzr branches.

Maybe it could check that all the changes have been merged
(somewhere?) and there's nothing uncommitted or unknown.


More information about the bazaar mailing list