[Merge] lp:~vila/bzr/323111-orphan-config-option into lp:bzr

[Vincent Ladeuil]

Forwarding to bazaar at lists.canonical.com to get a larger feedback.
>>>>> Martin Pool <mbp at sourcefrog.net> writes:

    > On 17 September 2010 22:37, Vincent Ladeuil <v.ladeuil+lp at free.fr> wrote:
    >>>>>>> Martin Pool <mbp at sourcefrog.net> writes:
    >> 
    >> <snip/>
    >> 
    >>    > Mm, or better I'd like to see the rules file group them in to classes
    >>    > of 'precious', 'junk', etc, then perhaps different orphan policies
    >>    > depending on class.
    >> 
    >> That exactly what I feared, you're trying to fit precious/junk handling
    >> into this bug fix which, while related, will not allow addressing the
    >> whole problem.
    >> 
    >> I am *not* trying to handle precious files here not delete junk files,
    >> I'm just putting unversioned file away when they block deleting a
    >> directory.
    >> 
    >> That's only *one* aspect and people are suffering from this *today*.

    > Sorry, I didn't mean to imply this is part of this bug, it was a
    > discussion of follow-on changes.

Ha ok, right, I completely misunderstood then.

    > I think you are quite right to change just this before bringing in
    > a junk category.  However, I do think you should change the option
    > values.

So, for this submission, and trying to take all applicable remarks into
account, I will:

- rename 'always' to 'move'
- rename 'never' to 'conflict'
- add 'bzr-orphans' to the default ignore list

- delay turning callables into full-fledged ones until the impact of the
  junk/repcious files handling make it clearer what this fix is really
  suppposed to provide (I kind of suspect it won't have to make a
  decision anymore if the unversioned files are handled higher in the
  stack).

and:

- make 'conflict' the default, so people impacted by this bug can turn
  it to 'move' and all the other will remained un-impacted until the
  follow-on changes are implemented properly.

For the follow-on changes, we need a bit more analysis to:

- check which commands should now take the junk files into account (at
  least pull/merge/switch should delete them even before the orphaning
  triggered, clean-tree should handle them appropriately, but they may
  be other. Thoughts ?)

- discuss a bit more what a 'precious' file is. 

I'm not clear about what a precious but *unversioned* file is... either
it's really precious and it's versioned or it can be generated but I
dont quite see why it should be called precious then or... what ? 

What kind of file should bzr never delete, yet, don't handle (or even
ignore) ? A project settings file ? But in this case such a file
shouldn't be in a directory that don't exist anymore for a given tree
revision no ?

         Vincent