<div dir="ltr">2008/9/28 Marius Kruger <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:amanic@gmail.com">amanic@gmail.com</a>></span><br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div dir="ltr">2008/9/3 John Arbash Meinel <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:john@arbash-meinel.com" target="_blank">john@arbash-meinel.com</a>></span><div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c"><br><div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<font color="#888888">John Arbash Meinel has voted resubmit.<br>
Status is now: Resubmit<br>
Comment:<br>
I think the general consensus is that we should use "get_master_branch().nick". If that isn't the case, then we should discuss it more on the mailing list.</font><div><div></div><div><br>
<br>
For details, see: <a href="http://bundlebuggy.aaronbentley.com/project/bzr/request/%3C418c22640807222226s7c2a544n2d34469a2c3e91a1%40mail.gmail.com%3E" target="_blank">http://bundlebuggy.aaronbentley.com/project/bzr/request/%3C418c22640807222226s7c2a544n2d34469a2c3e91a1%40mail.gmail.com%3E</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div> <br></div></div>I still don't agree, You want ALL checkouts to ALWAYS obtain the nick of the master branch.<br>* I think people might still want to be able to override the default nick (obtained from the master) with something else.<br>
I think that the switch use case is a special type of checkout which is there to aid a specific workflow.<br> I want it to work nice for that workflow, without impacting other worklows or forcing a checkout to have the same nick as its master.<br>
* Matthew is concerned about the network overhead implications, which might not be that bad considering that for commits it hits the network in any case.<br>* What should happen if the user *does* try to set the nick of the checkout?<br>
Should it try to set the nick on the master branch?<br> What if the master is a readonly branch or you don't want people to change that nick accidentally?<br> Or should it warn you that it is futile? "All your nick are belong to us!"<br>
<br>If people STILL think taking away the right of ALL freedomloving checkouts to have their own independent nicks, is what we want,<br>I'll be happy to make the change even if I don't fully aggree.<br></div></blockquote>
</div><br>I thought about it a little more and read Robert comments on the bug (<a href="https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/230903">https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/230903</a>). <br>And I think I finally understand what you have been saying:<br>
<blockquote><span class="JDpiNd"><img class="Jx04sb QrVm3d" id="upi" name="upi" src="images/cleardot.gif" height="16" width="16"></span>Robert Collins wrote:<br>Some notes -<br>
- implicit nicks should be drawing from the branch anyway<br>
- the implicit nick of a bound branch should draw from the url of the<br>
master<br>
- if there is an explicit nick of a bound branch, it should be changed<br>
to the nick of the new master when switching (and probably done at<br>
bind() time for consistency)<br> - switching should not create an explicit nick where there was none<br>
before<br></blockquote><div>So if and only if there is an explicit nick already set, it should it set the nick explicitly again.<br>Is there a way to unset the nick?<br><br>
</div></div>