Some feedback on colo plugin

[Stefan Monnier]

> We should think more about the specific uses of passing around an entire
> "bundle" of branches.  Originally, I intended bzr-colo to just simplify
> the local problem of working with many branches and figured that
> push/pull could be used simply by switching to a single branch and then
> pushing or pulling it as necessary.  What situations would you expect
> people to want to manage entire colocated workspaces in?

I have one case here: I work on several machines and use Bzr both for
revision control but also as a distributed file system, so on each
machine I have the same set of branches, so it'd be handy to pull/push
them together (I currently use a script to do that).

This said, there are other use cases where a different kind of behavior
would be useful, especially regarding pull: I'd like to be able to say
"bzr colo-pull" and have each of the branches updated, which means that
the branches will be pulled from their respective upstream branches if
any.  Also I'd like to be able to say "bzr colo-merge" which would merge
branches according to some description of relations between them (like
Git's "tracking" status).  Such a "bzr colo-merge" might look very
similar to bzr pipelines/looms.


        Stefan