RFC: bzr rm is hard to use

[Aaron Bentley]

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

Robert Collins wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-07-17 at 09:26 -0400, Aaron Bentley wrote:
>> Robert Collins wrote:
>>> Here's an alternative simpler to explain version:
>>> 'bzr rm foo' will make unversion and delete foo, making backups with the
>>> same rules 'bzr revert' uses.
>> You've left out some of the rules that revert uses:
>> - - revert of an added file that was modified by bzr deletes it.
>>
>> I don't really get why it makes sense to sometimes rename the file when
>> unversioning it, and sometimes not.
> 
> I included that rule in my first proposal

This one?

> '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's where I looked and didn't see it.  I see "modified by me" and
"unmodified", but not "modified by bzr", so the list of rules is incomplete.

> and I would prefer to keep
> it, but it made explaining it more complex. I like the behaviour of
> revert on a newly added file, and I would like 'bzr rm' to precisely ==
> 'bzr revert' for newly added things.

That's not what revert does, though.  When unversioning a file, it
*never* renames it to a backup.  It either deletes it or leaves it in place.

Aaron
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkpgg1QACgkQ0F+nu1YWqI0XzACfRIhLmkh3Nt3dPwAoBaqogRCi
g8YAniVq5syB42Bi+oUZv+NFB3eW/IFV
=NE+H
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----