On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 12:27 PM, John Szakmeister <<a href="mailto:john@szakmeister.net">john@szakmeister.net</a>> wrote: <div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 5:52 AM, John Arbash Meinel <<a href="mailto:john@arbash-meinel.com">john@arbash-meinel.com</a>> wrote: [snip] <div class="im">> I know Aaron has mentioned that in his layout, he might move the working > tree, but he is unlikely to move the repository, so absolute paths > actually work better for him. I do wonder what the breakpoint is. > > IMO, it is pretty clear for colo. If the branch is a subdirectory of the > tree root, then use a relative path. If the branch is outside, then *I* > would say, if it is within 1 or 2 '..' then use relative path. Otherwise > use absolute path. </div>That might be a reasonable alternative. Although, it does add an extra edge for the user to keep in mind. You can never be sure that if you move everything whether or not it'll all continue to work, unless you check and see whether it's using relative or absolute paths. :-( </blockquote><div> imho, "bzr status" should report the link type (absolute or relative), and perhaps we could also benefit from an additonal command to move working tree, something like "bzr relocate", that would handle the proper path reference update too. Ciao, Marco </div></div> -- Marco Pantaleoni