<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 9:17 AM, Ian Clatworthy <<a href="mailto:ian.clatworthy@internode.on.net">ian.clatworthy@internode.on.net</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> I've spent today putting down on paper how *I* would like nested 'items' to look from a UI perspective. Not all of this will arrive in the initial cut but I wanted to dig deep enough so that we could debate the initial design in a broader context. There are a few tweaks to the current UI suggested by this documentation. The main one is to to drop the 'reference' term and just use 'nested' everywhere I think it is needed. So in particular, that means: * join --reference => join --nested * reference * => nested * It's not a big deal but I feel this will make things a little more consistent for end users (who know nothing about the internal 'tree references' naming). Right now, --reference is a hidden option to join and the reference command is only days old, so I don't feel compelled to retain backwards compatibility here. Naively, most of the suggested enhancements are small to implement though I'm sure the overall work - including tests - is quite large. (The main one which worries me is the proposed propagation of new locations, but that might be shot down in any case.) As I said, not all of it will make whatever we deliver in the initial cut. I hope that the vision presented makes sense both from a end-user model and task efficiency perspective. IMNSHO, if we deliver this, Bazaar will have the nicest implementation of this feature around. But my opinion isn't what matters - it's yours! To make feedback easier, I've attached both the patch and a PDF version of the proposed section (7.5) of the User Guide. Enjoy, Ian C. </blockquote></div> Ian: I read your draft during a particularly boring meeting on Friday. :) I made some notes, but nothing major. I have three things I would like to say: 1. This is really well written. That's a talent. Thank you for sharing it. I would watch out for colloquialisms (like "no-no") which might not translate well, but that is minor. 2. I agree that --nested is better than --reference. Why use two words when one will work? "Nested" says what it is. "Reference" is too generic and bzr already has plenty of that with "references" to parent and push/pull branches. 3. I expect nested to confuse users. No matter how it is implemented someone will complain. I personally plan to use it a lot and I expect to have the manual open at all times. This is a sophisticated feature and the reader needs to pay close attention. Your draft implies this in a few places, and I think it's ok to come right out and say it. -M