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

[Wouter van Heyst]

On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 08:01:05AM -0600, John Arbash Meinel wrote:
> >> I refer to 'shared repositories' to talk about repositories which are a
> >> parent directory of many branches, and those branches have no repository
> >> co-located at their directory.
> > 
> > Yes. We all agree with this. The problem is that we're using the term
> > 'repository' which is incompatible with the CVS/SVN world. There's two
> > ways to deal with this. 
> > 
> >  1. We not rename anything. CVS/SVN get confused because standalone
> >     branches have repositories and the thing that they're used to thinking
> >     is a repository is now called a 'shared repository'.
> > 
> >  2. We rename 'shared repositories' into 'repositories'. This means that
> >     there is a need to come up with a name for what we currently call
> >     repositories. I'm in favor of this option.
> 
> +1 on changing the name of 'standalone repository', and renaming 'shared
> repositories' to 'repositories'.  I think 'repository' is the user-level
> term, of a group of branches.
> 
> I don't know what a good alternate name is for the internal stuff.
> (Heck, we could call it an 'archive' :))
> 
> archive, store, collection, ancestry, history, oldstuff, box, ...
> nothing is all that good.

Anything wrong with revision store?

Wouter van Heyst