Bazaar as Subversion replacement

[Nicholas Allen]

> Which is funny because 'bzr viz' has supported colored diffs for a long
> time. And the dialog looks a lot like the old 'bzr viz' version of diff.
>  So I wonder what happened to the coloring.
>
> But it sounds like Nicholas wants a side-by-side view (since you can't
> really edit in a unified diff view).
>   
Yes we need a user friendly visualisation and the ability to edit in 
place. A patch output would not be acceptable for us because of this.
> Certainly expanding 'gcommit' a bit would be reasonable. I cringe a
> little bit at doing that sort of work at commit time. But I guess my
> current workflow is to do 'bzr diff' review it, modify if necessary,
> then 'bzr commit'. Which sounds like what Nicholas wants. Just that he
> is used to programs doing all of the diff/review/edit/and finally commit
> with the command 'commit'.
>   
Yes that's right. Because we check files that pass review. If all files 
pass then we just click commit. Otherwise we click cancel. Fix 
outstanding issues and then repeat the process until all files pass review.
> I guess for a GUI, it is approximately the right time to do it. Though I
> can see reviewing the commit, and realizing you need to go modify
> another file, at which point you need to start all over again.
>   
If it's a small change then we make the change to the file and fit F5 in 
tortoise svn commit dialog to refresh the changes made. Otherwise we 
cancel the commit and then start over once the developer has fixed all 
problem highlighted in the review.

I think this is a very comfortable and logical workflow. If you separate 
into a review and commit process you cannot be guaranteed that every 
file was reviewed before committing. The commit dialog is showing 
exactly what will be committed and the reviewer can make sure they have 
reviewed everything before they give the go ahead.