bzr status

[David Cournapeau]

Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
>
> To provide a contrary perspective: I prefer it that way, because it
> means all the information I need to know what files are actually
> affected is all in one place [the status output], rather than having
> to be mentally combined from two [status and `pwd`], in what's likely
> to be a very lossy process (more than 2 or 3 ..'s very quickly gets
> very easy to make mistakes with).
>   

OTOH, the whole point of a relative status is that generally, when you
are inside a tree, you don't care so much about files "above" you. If
there are a lot of .., then I would say I am not at the 'right' place.
If both ways can be done, it would be the best, I guess.

David