08:16 < abentley> Better phrasing: 'what circumstances should cause us to produce a working tree in a repository branch'?

[Vincent LADEUIL]

As usual, take  my comments as from 'candide'  user, i.e. someone
just arriving,  beginning to use  bzr, nearly ignorant of  how it
works, having  just a  background in various  centralized version
control tools.

>>>>> "Aaron" == Aaron Bentley <aaron.bentley at utoronto.ca> writes:

    Aaron> Denys Duchier wrote:
    >> mm... how would I create an empty standalone branch?

<snip/>

    Aaron> Common operations should be easy, and newbie
    Aaron> operations, like creating standalone branches, should
    Aaron> be easiest.  If we had to have an option, I would
    Aaron> prefer --repository.

So far, bzr seems to keep its promises on this policy, keep up the
good work !

<snip/>

    >> All joking aside, I frequently want more extensive help -
    >> for example to be reminded of the many syntaxes accepted
    >> by --revision.  It's a nuisance to have to look at the
    >> source code to figure it out.

    Aaron> I agree.  It's on the wiki too, though.

But if only 'Those Who Know' can find it.... (I'm kidding here, I
know the doc is under work).

<snip/>

    >> Some commands have help that's no help at all, like
    >> "resolve": what is it for and what the heck does it do?

    Aaron>  Well, it's  for marking  a conflict  as  resolved.  I
    Aaron> agree  that could be  expanded, but I'm not  sure what
    Aaron> else to say, and I'm happy to admit this is because of
    Aaron> my implementor perspective.


But why  the hell do I  have to mark  a conflict as resolved  ? I
have already  worked to resolve  this conflict ! And  worse, even
informing bzr  that I  resolved it, I  still have  spurious files
staying in my work dirs...

I don't get the point here. Is it something still under work ? Or
will it stay that way in final version ?

    >>> I'd claim that creating an empty repository is a unique
    >>> command, whether it's phrased as "bzr create-repository"
    >>> or "bzr create --repository".
    >> 
    >> 
    >> I think you are influenced in this by your perspective as
    >> an implementor.  Consider the act of "reading": there are
    >> vast differences in the act of reading a novel and that of
    >> reading a comic book, but there is also an essential
    >> commonality of enterprise.  Giving them different names
    >> would probably not be that helpful (at least, not to the
    >> general public).

    Aaron> I guess I disagree about the degree of comonality.

    Aaron> Consider also that create-repository is a lot more
    Aaron> discoverable than create --repository.  

Agreed. But that's a lot of characters to type (in both cases :-)

    Aaron> The first would probably contain the term 'repository'
    Aaron> twice in the command listing; once in the name, once
    Aaron> in the description.  So anyone scanning over the list
    Aaron> of commands to figure out how to create a repository
    Aaron> would probably find it.

    Aaron> A command listing for 'create' might not have the
    Aaron> space to mention repositories at all.

A bit weak as an argument :-)

But all of this may be solved if the doc begins by an explanation
of the various terms  (repository, bound branches, checkout) with
an explanation of what one needs to begin working.

Just my 0.02 euros,

   Vincent