<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <meta content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type"> </head> <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"> Ian Clatworthy wrote: <blockquote cite="mid:49D0595B.7040509@internode.on.net" type="cite"> <pre wrap="">Matt Doran wrote: </pre> <blockquote type="cite"> <pre wrap="">I'm not very familiar with "branch.conf", but that doesn't seem to be a versioned file. Is there some way to provide versioned configuration through this scheme to allow a project to mandate particular rules/configuration? </pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap=""> Not currently. The path for the rules file can always point into the branch or another vcs-controlled location. We can't force users to specify that in their branch.conf (or locations.conf) file though. FWIW, I'm looking at adding "dependency rules", e.g. something like [requires] bzr = 1.14 projectX_stuff = 0.5 where projectX_stuff is a plugin. Again, these can go in a rules file along with other stuff like EOL rules, but I'm still not sure how we can ultimately force it into place. Ideas are welcome! </pre> </blockquote> Hmmm. To me the EOL files are conceptually similar to ignore rules. There are elements that are global, but there are elements that are project specific. e.g. A global rule might say, all ".bat" files to be CRLF. A project specific rule might be that test data may want to be stored unmodified (and tests would fail if this wasn't enforced). Would it be crazy to have a .bzrrules or .bzrconf file in the root of the project? This would be treated specially by bzr just like the ignores file. Matt </body> </html>