FEATURE REQ: group common commands under 'ls' instead of separate commands

[Kevin Smith]

Jan Hudec wrote:
> No, it's not. Status does *NOT* list files---it summarizes changes! Status on
> a clean checkout always produces an empty output. That's the way it's meant
> and useful. In short, status talks about changes while inventory talks about
> list of files.

The output from status is a list of files, which might be empty. If 
status listed anything other than files, then I would agree with you 
that it doesn't list files. But anything that it lists is a file. Just 
like inventory.

It still seems to me that we have this universe of possible files that 
might be queried (those in the working tree and those in the repo). 
Different commands list different subsets of those files.

Now, there's still a usability question of whether a given user task is 
done frequently enough that it deserves a separate command, even if it 
could be handled as an option to a different command. If I understand 
correctly, the current default behavior of bzr status is very similar to 
what bzr diff --short might do. Conceptually, I believe status and 
inventory are twins. But they still might belong apart for pragmatic 
reasons. Maybe.

Just because tla treated inventories as something distinct doesn't mean 
they really are. I now have some fear that the nature of bzr will change 
distinctly as tla folks join the team. One of the things I liked least 
about tla was its complexity, and one of the things I really like about 
bzr is its simplicity. I hope bzr retains its character.

One last thing: I didn't mean to hijack this thread. The original poster 
merely suggested folding the bzr unknowns and similar commands into 
other commands. Please don't lose sight of that request in all this 
discussion of whether or not some of the "big" commands should be folded 
together.

Kevin