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

[Robert Collins]

On Wed, 2006-03-01 at 15:49 -0500, James Blackwell wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 08:01:59AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
> > 
> > So an important note here - in the internal code of bzr the 'sharedness'
> > of a repository is taken into consideration in precisely two code paths:
> >  * when cloning to preserve that status
> >  * when determining if a repository can be used by a branch.
> > 
> > Other than that there is are conditionals looking at is_shared.
> > 
> > I don't understand how calling the same object doing the same job as
> > both the large scale repository and the small repository storing history
> > for a single branch different names can be a good idea.
> > 
> > I think I need to -see- this confusion in action.
> 
> In the prior sentence you seem to disagree. In the paragraph prior to
> that, you seem to agree. 

I'm not sure which ordering you mean there, but for clarity: I'm
describing how big the delta is in behaviour [its tiny] so that we can
actually assess the cost of giving the two behaviours different base
names vs different qualifiers.

> I can go on at length for why this should happen. I can refer to the
> requirements of good writing (clear & internally consistant). I can
> explain that writing is dependant upon terminology in the terms of
> building blocks and stable foundations.  I can remind you of the mandate
> that Bazaar-NG be easy to use is dependent upon Bazaar-NG being easy to
> learn.  I can even provide numbers if thats what it takes.  Explaining
> need for the change is easy.

Not really. Good writing is orthogonal to this issue - it needs to be
good however we choose; choosing stable terminology is also orthogonal -
once we take a position, we keep it - thats easy. Having this easy to
learn is *what* this discussion is about. 

> What I can not do is express why you're against this. There seems to be
> general, but not unanimous,  agreement that changing the terminology
> somehow would help when it comes to describing Bazaar-NG to others.
> 
> Can you please enumerate your concerns for changing the terminology for
> 'shared repository' ?

If we make this into a new concept when it does not need to be then we:
 * Raise the bar for understanding bzr for new users
 * Make it harder to explain 
 * Make it harder to reconcile the external and internal behaviour which
will impact the number of contributors that make the transition from
user to developer/hacker.


Rob

-- 
GPG key available at: <http://www.robertcollins.net/keys.txt>.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20060302/252d3cea/attachment.pgp