marrying bundle and directive? (Re: [MERGE] Merge directive format 2, Bundle format 4)

[Ian Clatworthy]

Martin Pool wrote:

> Maybe this should just be called 'bzr send' - after all the main thing
> you will want to do with the file that's produced is to send it
> somewhere else.  I think it would be ok to have it either be able to
> send mail directly itself, or invoke your mail client if you have one
> configured.  But I do think it should probably default to just
> producing a file, not sending it, and maybe that makes the name
> inappropriate.
> 

If we're sure that the command ought to evolve to take --sign,
--mail-to, --message, etc., then I'm happy with send, or submit as Erik
suggested. Verbs are best, though nouns (e.g. diffset?, changepack?,
whatever) are ok if generation and transmission are decoupled.

I have a leaning though towards generation and transmission being
independent operations partly because email is simply one transmission
option and the nuances of it can be annoying to say the least. Lotus
Notes anyone? :-( I actually like generating a bundle and inspecting its
diff before attaching it to an email, but that's probably just me.

Are there things beyond bundles that we'll want to send around? In that
case, having multiple creation commands and a single send command/plugin
that deals with the associated nuances of transmission has a stronger case.

Ian C.