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

[James Blackwell]

> On 2/28/06, Jan Hudec <bulb at ucw.cz> wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 17:13:03 +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > > I haven't read the code that does repositories, and maybe that's a
> > > good thing, but my intuitive idea of "repository" is a "place where
> > > there's a bunch of branches". Is that too far off?
> >
> > No. It's not.
> 
> Well I think it's reasonably close, although I agree it's not exactly right.

No, its definitely wrong and exactly how this converation came up.

I used "repository" in this sense while describing the place that one can
store multiple branches while taking advantage of stored storage. This
definition is wrong, though, as standalone branches have a repository that
does not allow one to add extra branches.

My undestanding of repository is that its a place where revisions are
stored. This means that a repository is part of standalone branches and
part of a as-yet-unnamed thing in which one can put multiple branches into
it.

We don't want want to call the as-yet-unnamed thing repositories at the
same time that we call the thing that holds revisions in standalone
branches repositories. This would leave the documentation and the users
in a confusing state in which we'd sometimes say "a repository that holds
multiple branches" and other times "the repository in a standalone branch,
which doesn't hold any branches at all".

The question is not "will there be a new term". The first question is actually
who gets the new term ("the thing that users can store multiple branches
in" or "the generic name for something that stores revisions") and what
that term shall be.


> > However from what you said, it's not clear whether you think that a
> > branch is always in a repository or not. And it's rather important
> > distinction here.
> 
> I see your point, but I don't think it's worth introducing new terminology.
> 
> > > I think the bar for introducing new terminology should be _very_ high.
> > > With mercurial and git out there, people aren't going to swallow too
> > > much bzr-specific learning before they loose interest.
> >
> > The concept is already introduced. People will be learning of it either
> > way. The question is whether it is clearer to call that concept
> > 'repository' or something else.
> 
> No I think the concept is _very_ close to the CVS usage, the only
> difference is that in bzr branches don't have to be in a repository -
> but I think people are getting used to that idea with git/hg/tla etc.
> 
> So I agree repository isn't the _perfect_ word, but I think it gets a
> user's brain closer to where we want than "basket" or some other word
> with no VCS meaning.
> 
> cheers

-- 
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/20060228/cee1a202/attachment.pgp