[TERMINOLOGY] rename "changesets" to "revision bundles"

[Aaron Bentley]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Michael Ellerman wrote:
| On 5/27/06, Aaron Bentley <aaron.bentley at utoronto.ca> wrote:
|
|> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
|> Hash: SHA1
|>
|> Michael Ellerman wrote:
|> | hg bundle FILE DEST
|> |
|> | create a changegroup file
|>
|> Freaky.  The "bundle" command doesn't generate bundles.
|>
|> I was thinking of "bundle-revisions" as an alternative to "bundle",
|> since John doesn't like it.  John says "I'm okay with bundle-revisions,
|> but it seems a little long".
|
|
| Yeah, that is a little weird. Perhaps bzr should have a "groupchanges"
| command which creates "bundles"?
|
| I kind of like bundle as a name, but I think it would be best to avoid
| using it unless bzr bundles are semantically equivalent to hg bundles
| - otherwise we're asking for confusion.

~From what I can tell, mercurial has two formats:
1. a patch/changeset format produced by hg export.  It looks to me like
this is lacking metadata, but I could be wrong.
2. a bundle format that isn't intended to be human-readable.

~From http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/index.cgi/CommunicatingChanges

===
Import/Export
This is primarily used in scenarios where changes get reviewed before
being applied to a central repository.

In combination with the push/pull method, it's common to post patches
generated by export to a mailing list, along with instructions for
pulling from their source repository.
===

So it appears import/export is not a replacement for pull.

hg changegroups/bundles are a binary format that is not suitable for
human consumption.

So no, we're not doing quite the same thing as them.  I'd say it's close
enough, though.

Aaron
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFEe5lT0F+nu1YWqI0RAuF1AJwJtCoDbcTzMJK7m72TBoByNr4WXgCdGp4A
uz12kaPymTSYrHo2M9eQG6E=
=EKWM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----