[RFC] New name for 'repositories' - 'baskets'

[David Allouche]

On Fri, 2006-03-03 at 19:05 +0100, Jan Hudec wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 03, 2006 at 01:23:09 +0100, David Allouche wrote:
> > 
> > The fact that there is indeed a repository inside a standalone branch
> > appears to me like an implementation detail that's not really relevant
> > to the user experience. It might be a bit difficult to grasp for people
> > not used to darcs/monotone/git/mercurial and not really interested in
> > the inner workings of bzr, but I think those are also the people who
> > neither need nor want to know about it.
> 
> Yes, repository inside a standalone branch is an implementation detail.
> 
> Unfortunately users do have some associations with the word 'repository',
> which will lead some of them to think there is a 'repository'(random-user) in
> a stand-alone branch and others to think there is not.

I do not see that as a problem. If some people want to assume things,
they will do it. Adding terms like "basket" is not going to help since
they can just be read as "the snob's name for a repository in bzr".

> > The only gotcha there, is that technical discussions mentioning
> > repositories (the implementation detail, that is also present in
> > standalone branches) might be a bit confusing to the innocent bystander.
> > I find it acceptable since the only alternative seems to be exposing new
> > users to a seemingly gratuitous new term.
> 
> It never does any good if the same term is used with two meanings in the same
> context:
> 
> You create standalone branch by 'bzr branch' command.
> Branches store revision data in repositories.
> Repository is created with 'bzr make-repository'.
> So do I need to do 'bzr make-repository' to create a stand-alone branch?

There is an apparent logical flaw in this reasoning, I do not know what
point your are trying to make here.

People who cannot think straight and who draw erroneous conclusions from
correct information are not the ones we should go out of our way to care
for. Instead, we should care for intelligent people who want to get
their work done after learning as few new things as possible.

> > PS: I hope that bzr will allow me to abuse standalone branches to let me
> > tie branches-without-repo to them. It could be handy and it would be a
> > nice way to expose the orthogonal nature of the various concepts.
> 
> Which however means that the repository of a stand-alone branch becomes
> user-visible and therefore requires user-level name!

Yes, a "repository" is a fine name.

What I meant is that I wish bzr would not impose arbitrary restrictions
on what the repository-in-a-standalone branch can do. That I wish it
would be functionally equivalent to a shared repository.

Then, there is no need for separate notions. Creating a standalone
branch creates a repository. A repository can be used by multiple
branches.
-- 
                                                            -- ddaa
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20060305/57a4a9a1/attachment.pgp