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

[Aaron Bentley]

Kevin Smith wrote:
> I now have some fear that the nature of bzr will change
> distinctly as tla folks join the team.

Please don't go all chicken-little on us.  Bzr's development team has
always been intimately related to tla, and everyone involved wants bzr
to be simple.  Also, the 'status' and 'inventory' commands were
introduced by Martin, the one person who has not contributed to the tla
codebase.

The major contributors to bzr are all familiar with tla, but bzr is a
reaction to tla-- and attempt to produce something simpler by changing
the model.  Most of us, like myself, John and Robert, were involved in
Bazaar 1, which was an attempt to produce an Arch implementation that
was easier to use.  I also wrote Fai, which had the same goal.  Fai had
a 'revisions' command that folded tla missing, tla logs, tla revisions
and several others into one command.  Much the same thing being proposed
for 'status'.

So it's not that we think tla's UI is great-- everyone here doesn't
think that.  And it's not that I'm opposed to folding commands with the
same output type into one command; I've done it myself.  It's that some
of us don't agree that this *particular* change makes sense.

Aaron