bzr with bzr+ssh noisy and output muddled.
martitzam at gmail.com
Thu Jun 18 01:47:16 BST 2009
As a user I agree both with your prioritization and that strict
enforcement of --quiet (which is not yet) is a worthy goal for bzr.
On 6/17/09, Martin Pool <mbp at sourcefrog.net> wrote:
> 2009/6/18 Maritza Mendez <martitzam at gmail.com>:
>> Thank you for your collaborative leadership.
>> When I started using Unix 20 years ago (Hey! I'm still younger than
>> of you!) the first thing I remember learning is "simple tools that do
>> thing well." The second thing I learned was "succeed silently." I don't
>> know if Unix community can claim these as original, but they're good
>> principles. And like all the best principles, there are exceptions.
>> So I would like to see an option to tell bzr to essentially "keep quiet
>> unless there is a problem" which would be accessible by (and hopefully
>> honored by) all bzr commands. Quiet does not have to be the default.
>> available (and documented) is enough. This will make bzr script
>> Finally, I would vote to keep the progres bar available even after
>> transports are prefected. There will be bugs, maybe not even caused by
>> bzr. Knowing right away what stage the failure occurred in could really
>> speed up debugging.
> There is a --quiet option, and there is
> <https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/bzr/+bug/320035> asking that it
> should also turn off the progress bar, as well as other messages. (It
> probably does not suppress every message that it should at present.)
> I think at the moment getting the other aspects of progress display
> right is more important.
> Martin <http://launchpad.net/~mbp/>
Sent from my mobile device
More information about the bazaar