"submit" command naming - just "bundle" preferred?
aaron.bentley at utoronto.ca
Thu Jul 19 19:58:29 BST 2007
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Adeodato Simó wrote:
> First, I must say I'd find desirable to have the command capable of be
> invoking the user's editor to write the body, and have bzr send the
> message. I won't argue whether this should be the default mode or not,
> just stating that it'd be nice to have.
But does the world really need another mail client? Especially when
mutt behaves like that already?
> Now, for spawning the user's prefered MUA to send the message, I propose
> to use xdg-email program  from the FreeDesktop.org project.
It doesn't seem to be installed on my Etch. Is it very popular?
>> 2. how do we configure the target address?
> I guess the answer is "in branch.conf".
That's not really what I was asking. Given that we'll use our normal
configuration mechanism, what values will we use? How's the policy
supposed to work?
Will the mail attachments have sensible names? Can I configure Bazaar
to stick them in a particular directory instead of a temp one?
> Pardon my ignorance then, but
> how is this useful if that file is not copied when branching?
It doesn't have to be copied to have sensible values. If you want to
clone a branch, cp -a will do that for you. 'branch' is for intelligent
One option is to copy the target values. But the target might be
different for the mainline and branches derived from it. It would be
nice if branching from bzr.dev produced a branch with a different target
from bzr.dev's own target, for example.
>> Given a send command that actually sends mail, this is pretty good. -o
>> will be rarely used, for sure.
> I'm curious, what's the use case for send -o, instead of using bundle -o?
This in the context of considering 'send' a total replacement for 'bundle'.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the bazaar