[RFC] branch --bind

[A. S. Budden]

2010/1/5 Jelmer Vernooij <jelmer at samba.org>:
> On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 10:51 +1000, Ian Clatworthy wrote:
>> I've put together a patch extending the branch command with a --bind
>> option. See
>> https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~ian-clatworthy/bzr/branch-bind-option/+merge/16725.
>> The intent is that
>>
>>   branch --bind X Y
>>
>> is equivalent to
>>
>>   branch X Y
>>   cd Y
>>   bind X
>>   cd -
>>
>> Poolie has approved this patch. lifeless and fullermd have asked for
>> more discussion before this lands. Some background ...
>>
>> FWIW, my short term driver for this is a better qbranch dialog. Due to
>> locking considerations, I can't easily add a "Bind to parent" checkbox
>> to qbranch without pushing the functionality down into the bzr core.
>>
>> Longer term, I think our "checkout" model is broken - heavyweight and
>> lightweight checkouts have different semantics - and needs fixing. I'd
>> like to see lightweight checkouts the default with the option of a true
>> (history horizon) cache. That's a separate debate though. If anything,
>> having "branch --bind" is good because we can introduce new users to
>> bound branches without needing to explain all the complexity/issues
>> around various checkout types.
> +1
>
> I like the term "bound branch" much better than checkout:
>
>  * checkout is associated historically with working copies in
> Subversion / CVS; for git users it means switching branch
>  * the name "bound branch" is self-explanatory

In the spirit of healthy debate, I must say that I disagree with this.
 My biggest criticism of the otherwise excellent Bazaar Explorer is
the use of "bound branch" instead of "heavyweight checkout" (and the
associated removal of the lightweight/heavyweight option from the
checkout dialog box).  By way of explanation: