"submit" command naming - just "bundle" preferred?

[Ian Clatworthy]

Aaron Bentley wrote:
> Aaron Bentley wrote:
>> I have made a bunch of the changes you requested.  Here's a merge directive.
> 
>> Additionally, I've introduced a new "submit" command, as a successor to
>> "bundle" and "merge-directive".  "bundle" is now an alias for "submit",
>> and "merge-directive" is hidden.
> 
> I've merged from bzr.dev, so here's an updated bundle.

I've been a little uneasy about introducing 'submit' as a new command
name for a few weeks now. I haven't spoken up because I didn't have a
better alternative, I hoped someone else would, and I had other things I
needed to get done first. My concern boils down to this: we aren't
actually submitting anything - we're just preparing something to submit.

I've been scanning the user doc of other DVCS tools - Mercurial, Git,
Monotone, Darcs, SVK - lately looking for what they call this feature,
hoping to find something better. Here's the named used in each case:

* Mercurial - bundle
* Git - format-patch (looks closest to me out of the 120 cmds)
* Montotone - automate packet_for_* (very low level & ugly)
* Darcs - send ... (but this really does email after signing)
* SVK - push -P patchname upstream

Of those, I like "bundle" the most. Force of habit perhaps but "bundle"
works well for Mercurial where it's treated as both a verb and a noun.
Just like "patch".

If we're introducing "submit" and making "bundle" an alias of it, the
partial argument about not changing bundle's UI disappears doesn't it?
In that case, couldn't we just fix "bundle" and not introduce "submit"?

Ian C.