[RFC] branch --bind

[Ian Clatworthy]

Robert Collins wrote:

> That said it makes the surface area larger and thus more explaining is
> needed. In this very debate the --lightweight option to checkout is an
> example of this very issue. 

Sorry. I simply don't see how simplifying instructions (e.g. those for
the Emacs developers) from "run branch, then run bind" down to "run
branch --bind" is increasing surface area and making Bazaar more complex.

>> Bound branches are a simple concept: a commit to the local branch also
>> gets committed to the master branch. That's dead easy to explain,
>> particularly to anyone familar with central VCS tools.
> 
> They are a concept that we regularly have to explain to people on IRC
> and this list. I don't have hard stats, but it turns up a lot, which is
> why we have to fix it.

Fix what? Are you saying that bound branches should be removed and that
everyone should use heavyweight checkouts instead? If so, I can only
strongly disagree. :-(

In my experience:

* heavyweight checkouts can be achieved using bound branches but
  not vice versa
* having 2 types of checkouts with different semantics is *painful*
  to explain and support
* OTOH, bound branches are easy to explain
* the majority of users expect "checkout" to mean working tree ala
  CVS and SVN. (Even experienced bzr users like Mark and Kiko thought
  this until recently btw.)

Having said all that, all I want to do *now* is add a single option to
branch. You seem to be blocking that because you disagree with the
longer term direction I'd like to go, i.e. getting rid of heavyweight
checkouts in good time?

Ian C.