bzr bundle > file

[Alexander Belchenko]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Aaron Bentley пишет:
> Wichmann, Mats D wrote:
>>> Martin Pool wrote:
>>>> On 8/3/07, John Arbash Meinel <john at arbash-meinel.com> wrote:
>>>> I think we really must restore the previous default of writing to
>>>> stdout for bundle before releasing 19rc1.
>>> Do you mean for "bundle"?  There is no such command anymore
>> Isn't it a little drastic to just toss the command
>> with no warning?
> 
> Not for this command.  If I could burn it, vivisect it, and desecrate
> its mother's grave, I would.  Alas, I can only toss it.
> 
>> many people depend on it.
> 
> No functionality has been lost.
> 
>> Seems
>> like the bugreports have suggested at least an
>> alias, which preserves the old behavior
> 
> You want a particular old behavior.  I very much doubt you want the full
> complement of its old behavior.  Especially considering that it would
> now emit bundle format 4 without a merge-directive wrapper.
> 
>> (i.e.,
>> writing to stdout by default so the subject line
>> continues to work)
> 
> What I provided was "submit", which took similar parameters to "bundle",
> but:
> 
> 1. The output was a merge directive containing a bundle, not a raw bundle.
> 2. The -r specification worked correctly.
> 3. The -r specification did not affect the bundle, only the merge
> directive and preview patch.
> 4. The target branch was no longer optional.
> 5. Options and arguments (public_branch, --no-bundle) pertaining to
> merge directives were supported.
> 
> I was asked to change this to "send" and make -o mandatory.  I have done so.
> 
> Martin is now asking to revert to the old behavior.  I am trying to
> understand *what* he wishes to revert to the old behavior.  Does he
> propose resurrecting the original bundle command implementation in all
> its glory?  Does he propose making -o optional for "send"?  Does he want
> "send" and "bundle" to be the same function, invoked with different
> parameters?

Here's my use case: I use bundles to update bzr.dev branches on my server
http://bzrdev.bialix.com. For now and until september I stick with bzr 0.18
on server (because the server is FreeBSD, and I should wait until bsd port
will appears and my provider will update bzr).
So I will not upgrade my local machine until I have a way to
easily send bundles from local machine to server. It's not really
show-stopper for me, but I believe in backward compatibility,
adn bzr always play well in this respect. (May be I'm wrong.)

[µ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGuJNvzYr338mxwCURArXZAJ4gODypD7FgZHGbO/d+j6BGhfx+HgCfT2ED
+jn4BWgkjlksQiaa6jbDWb0=
=jR//
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----