Latest bazaar release

[Mark A. Flacy]

Yeah, the sister survey to the one used by the OP.

Tom Browder <tom.browder at gmail.com> wrote:
>On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:21 PM, Mark A. Flacy <mflacy at verizon.net>
>wrote:
>> On Wednesday, August 07, 2013 11:39:22 PM Stefan Monnier wrote:
>...
>> Well, a couple of disjoint things:
>...
>> 1) IBM Clearcase UCM's version of 'bzr status' (cleartool lsact
>-long) gives
>> you paths based upon the view's root directory, versus relative to
>wherever
>> you happen to be in the view. Mercurial's status command (at least in
>> version 2.2.2, which I happen to have installed) gives status based
>on the
>> project root. 'git status' also acts the same way.
>
>Not the git I use (1.8.3.2).  I'm two levels deep in my repo:
>
>  $ git status
>#	../run.txt
>#	../tape1conv.log
>#	tape1conv.log
>...
>nothing added to commit but untracked files present (use "git add" to
>track)
>
>That's what I like: file lists relative to my view (pwd)!
>
>But I agree that I can alias any required switch to get what I
>want--if it's available, of course.
>
>> Changing the default is going to break almost all scripts that are
>out
>> there, IMO. Those that do the equivalent of the bash idiom...
>>
>> {
>>
>> cd $( bzr root )
>>
>> # run whatever status manipulating commands that you want which
>assume
>>
>> # that your CWD is the project root
>>
>> }
>>
>> ...won't notice the change. It seems unlikely to me that many people
>would
>> write their scripts in such a fashion.
>
>Have you access to a survey indicating that?
>
>Best,
>
>-Tom

-- 
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20130808/3889c72b/attachment.html>