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

[David Allouche]

On Wed, 2006-03-01 at 09:42 +0100, Erik Bågfors wrote:
> A repository is a "place/thing/whatever" that stores your revision
> data. There are two kinds of repositories in bzr.
> 
> A shared repository can contain multiple branches, this is the kind of
> repository that you find in for example subversion.
> 
> A "none shared/internal/branch specific/private/whatever" repository
> is contained in a stand alone branch and is automatically created
> whenever you create a stand alone branch.  This type of repository can
> not contain multiple branches
> -------
> 
> Is there anything not clear about that description?
> 
> I think we just need to find a clear name for "shared" and "none shared".

On the off chance that adding one more message might help:

Let's consider how we _spontaneously_ talk about the various objects,
because that's what the users will be the most exposed to, through IRC
chats, mailing list discussions, blogs, and casual wiki pages (that is
not the carefully-crafted-not-to-confuse-newbies documentation pages).

I say "a checkout" to mean a bare checkout, regardless of where its
history is stored.

I say "a branch" to mean either "a branch using a shared-repository", or
"a standalone branch", or even "a standalone checkout".

I say "a repository" to mean "a shared-repository".

When I speak about the repository in a self contained branch or checkout
I expect I would just to say "branch".

The fact that there is indeed a repository inside a standalone branch
appears to me like an implementation detail that's not really relevant
to the user experience. It might be a bit difficult to grasp for people
not used to darcs/monotone/git/mercurial and not really interested in
the inner workings of bzr, but I think those are also the people who
neither need nor want to know about it.

The only gotcha there, is that technical discussions mentioning
repositories (the implementation detail, that is also present in
standalone branches) might be a bit confusing to the innocent bystander.
I find it acceptable since the only alternative seems to be exposing new
users to a seemingly gratuitous new term.

PS: I hope that bzr will allow me to abuse standalone branches to let me
tie branches-without-repo to them. It could be handy and it would be a
nice way to expose the orthogonal nature of the various concepts.
-- 
                                                            -- ddaa
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20060303/3899d212/attachment.pgp