[RFC] New name for 'repositories' - 'baskets'

[James Blackwell]

On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 11:09:05PM +0100, Jan Hudec wrote:
> > If we were going to change away from Repository as the user-level
> > object, I would prefer to call it Archive again.
> 
> That's what I actually suggested as well, but JBlack disagreed.
> I think 'archive'(Arch) is closer to 'repository'(bzr,user-level) than
> 'repository'(CVS) is.

Oh, I don't disagree that its closer. I'm also not concerned with the term
because of the number of people using something arch based. The problem I
have with it is that a lot of people have studied the arch model (strike
one), know that arch -> bazaar -> bazaar-ng (strike two) and replacing one
'overloaded' term with another doesn't seem wise (strike three).

> > But I think the better thing would be to switch to calling the
> > user-level object Repository, and the code-level object something else.
> > (Store has a small problem because we already have a Store, but code
> > level people can adapt easier and faster than user-level people).
> > 
> > Basket is okay as a term, but I feel it is very informal. A 'basket of
> > branches' seems like they are just thrown together. Not organized, etc.

Wouldn't you want to keep your knitting in a basket during a hard day's
work of cherrypicking? Then you could take your standalone branches with
their handbaskets out at night so that you could work by the
starmerge-light. ;)

I'm not married to the term. But its a thought. =)

> But if you think of it, they in fact, really are not organized. They just
> share the storage, but are otherwise independent. Which is one of the things
> in which it is different from 'repository'(CVS).

I agree. It's entirely possible that people will do _exactly_ that --
stick a pile of disorganized branches into one lump that would practically
take a basket to carry around. =)

> > Both Archive and Repository have a little more respect. Like where you
> > want to store your stuff, rather than where you put the stuff you pulled
> > out of your pockets.
> > 
> > So my preferred naming is:
> > 
> > #1: Call user-level object repository, and keep 'make-repository', call
> > the underlying implementation store, to go with .bzr/store/
> > 
> > #2: Call a collection of branches an "Archive" and leave the internals
> > alone.
> 
> -- 
> 						 Jan 'Bulb' Hudec <bulb at ucw.cz>



-- 
My home page:   <a href="http://jblack.linuxguru.net">James Blackwell</a>
Gnupg 06357400  F-print AAE4 8C76 58DA 5902 761D  247A 8A55 DA73 0635 7400
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20060224/68838869/attachment.pgp