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

[Adeodato Simó]

* Aaron Bentley [Mon, 02 Jul 2007 01:11:46 -0400]:

> Martin Pool wrote:

> > 'bundle' is shorter than 'merge-directive' but neither name is really
> > great because of contradictions like 'bundle --no-bundle'.

> Agreed.

Well, that was a mistake of mine, proposing --no-bundle, because I don't
think the option should be called --no-bundle: the emphasis should IMHO
be in the fact that the output will carry a public branch URL, not that
incidentally there won't be a bundle attached.

So I personally would vote for keeping `bundle` (after all, it's been
there since 0.8), and change the option name instead, to --public-branch
or something similar.
  
  % bzr bundle --public-branch ../bzr.dev http://mysite.com/bzr.fixfoo
  % bzr bundle --public-branch ../bzr.dev

If the name is to change... I'll do like everybody else and post a
suggestion: `bzr pack`.

Cheers,

-- 
Adeodato Simó                                     dato at net.com.org.es
Debian Developer                                  adeodato at debian.org
 
«A lo que iba. El amor es como el embutido: hay lomo embuchado y hay
mortadela.»
                -- Carlos Ruiz Zafón, “La sombra del viento”