remove vs rm vs forget (was [MERGE] remove --new)

[James Blackwell]

On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 05:34:50PM +0100, Martin Pool wrote:
> So I propose to do this:
> 
>   bzr rm foo      -- delete it from the working directory and inventory
>   bzr remove foo  -- just remove from the inventory, leave the file

Be careful around this area. Gnuarch newbies had constant confusion about
rm vs remove. There was frequent confusion about one vs. the other. People
often complainted that they ran one when they meant the other.  I think
the confusion was based in "rm means remove to the filesystem. So what
does remove mean?" You get the idea.

Is there really a need for rm? I thought running "$ rm file" already
resulted in  "bzr rm foo" behaviour?

My personal opinion is that the single behaviour is ideal. Granted, its a
little annoying to have to take two steps to remove a file when the
command alias for commit includes --strict. The result is discoverable
in that users have a clear idea of the three choices that they can make
with an unknown file (I can delete the file, I can add the file, or I can
ignore the file).

> 'remove' is not such a great name for it.  I had been thinking
> 'unversion', or 'forget' which would be consistent with hg.  
> On the whole I suggest making the canonical name 'forget' and 'remove'
> as an alias.

Yeah. If you want to have two, then remove really should be something
else. Forget would be an excellent choice.

-- 
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/20060604/8f249c82/attachment.pgp