[RFC] Update should mention WHAT it is up to date with
nmb at wartburg.edu
Thu Dec 10 01:22:29 GMT 2009
There have been a sequence of bugs arising from the fact that ``bzr
update`` is a legitimate command in a branch with its own working tree,
but often it doesn't do what users want. What people often want is to
get their branch "up to date" with some other branch and they should be
using ``bzr pull`` or ``bzr merge`` to do so. I run into the situation
when using bound branches that I often unbind for offline commits.
Then, when unbound, ``bzr up`` is a successful no-op, but what I *meant*
is to make this branch up to date with the branch it was bound to.
I've wanted for a while to address this by using the message: "Up to
date at revision x of branch y" and I have a branch of bzr that does
that, but it causes lots of test failures (understandably) and before I
go fixing all of them, I wanted to hear some feedback.
Do people feel that this will address the issue with update being not
what people want, by informing them that their working tree is up to
date with its (local) branch? Is it otherwise useful (e.g. for those
using switch a lot)?
Is there a bzrlib function to take a branch.base URL and shorten it (for
example, file:/// URLs could have the URL prefix removed)? Should we
try to use "." in the shortened form if possible?
For tests that have very long and varying branch names, should I just
change assertEndsWith("Up to date at revision 1\n") to an appropriate
More information about the bazaar