push + bind in a single operation ?

[Erik Bågfors]

> > I'm a big fan of letting pull and push be each others opposites.  so,
> > I vote branch.
>
> branch is used to create a new line of development, which this isn't
> doing: its creating a mirror of the current line of development, *and*
> making the current branch a checkout of the remote.

True,

But in a more general case.  I find this confusing


1) I want to create a mirror of my branch on a public location. I do
NOT want to create a new line of development.  I can use
"bzr push sftp://",
then whenever I want to update the mirror I can use
"bzr push"

2) I want to create a mirror of bzr.dev on my laptop, and follow
development.  I do NOT want to create a new line of development right
now.  What I need to do is
bzr branch http://...../bzr.dev
Then, "cd bzr.dev; bzr pull" when I want to update

So, in the second case, I cannot use "bzr pull" to pull down the
entire branch. I need to do  branch. In fact, I can use "bzr get"
instead, which is the same thing, but fits my thinking better, since I
don't want a new line of development.

That's why I would like pull and push to work the same way.

Actually, in the second case, I guess using "bzr checkout" is a good
idea? Since I don't want to commit to it by mistake and the checkout
makes it readonly.
/Erik