[MERGE] bzr rm should delete the working file (Bug #82602)

[John Arbash Meinel]

Aaron Bentley wrote:
> John Arbash Meinel wrote:
>> There are a couple different ways of using 'bzr rm'. For *me* if I'm
>> 'rm' ing a file, I'm done with it. The chance that I want to unversion a
>> file but not actually delete it is in the low fractions of a percent
>> case. So having to do "bzr rm foo; rm foo" is a pain. Especially
>> considering "bzr mv foo bar" moves it for me, and "bzr mkdir dir" will
>> create the directory, etc.
> 
> Yeah, but plain old "rm" does this, and it's easier to type, too.  Yeah,
> it won't save you from yourself if you try to delete a modified file,
> but-- guess what's more annoying than "bzr rm foo; rm foo"?
> 
> "bzr rm foo; ls; rm foo".

Agreed.

> 
> If we're going to delete it, let's just delete it.  Being "smart" is
> often stupid.  I can't imagine why I'd want "bzr rm" to delete the file,
> but if I did, I'd want it to delete the file ALL THE TIME.  If you're
> trying to save me from deleting modified files, then error out if you
> must, but don't give me inconsistent behavior.

That was my understanding / expectation. That "bzr rm foo" would fail if
it would delete a modified file, and you can do "bzr rm --force foo" to
make it continue.


> 
> I for one will be setting an alias of "remove=remove --keep".  I may
> also set "rm=remove --force", but like I said, I don't see the point in
> typing more to achieve the same result.
> 
> Aaron

John
=:->