RFC: bzr rm is hard to use

Ian Clatworthy ian.clatworthy at internode.on.net
Thu Jul 16 03:33:17 BST 2009

Robert Collins wrote:
> So, we've got a very complex 'bzr rm'. I don't know about you guys, but
> I'm starting to hate using it - I *always* end up having to type
> '--force' because we're hugely cautious.

I dislike it as well. I always find I need an option of some kind - "bzr
rm" doesn't Just Work without one. That's a symptom of a poor UI IMO.

> Specifically, I'd like (and some of these may be current behaviour):
> 'bzr rm' of an added file to do what 'bzr revert' of the same file does:
> - just unversion it. *IF* --force' is given then delete it.
> 'bzr rm' of a missing file to Just Do It
> 'bzr rm' of a file that has been modified by me to mv it to a backup
> using the same scheme 'bzr revert' does.
> 'bzr rm' of an unmodified file to Just Do It
> 'bzr rm --keep' on any of the cases above that remove the file to
> preserve the file on disk.

That sounds ok to me. I'd also settle for something realy simple like:

* bzr rm - unversion the file
* bzr rm --delete - unversion the file and delete it from disk

I suspect your proposal is better, if somewhat harder to explain. In
either case, the important bit to me is that "bzr add xx; bzr rm xx" is
a no-op.

Ian C.

More information about the bazaar mailing list