bzr status

[Martin Pool]

On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 7:19 PM, Teemu Likonen <tlikonen at iki.fi> wrote:
> Aaron Bentley (2008-11-10 20:07 -0500) wrote:
>
>> Robert Collins wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2008-11-10 at 06:51 +0000, Russel Winder wrote:
>>>> Is there any possibility of a change in bzr on this?
>>>
>>> Yes.
>>
>> The issue was, last time we tried it, there was violent disagreement
>> on whether status should show all changes in the tree, or only those
>> in the files beneath the current working directory.
>
> I believe that most users expect "bzr commit" to commit changes to files
> shown by "bzr status" and "bzr diff". Hence showing all files would be
> expected.
>
>    modified:
>      file1
>      dir/file2
>      ../../file3

I agree with that logic.  And it's more than just a current accident
that commit is tree wide, but a core principle that commits, merges,
merge requests, etc are fundamentally tree-wide (like git, unlike
svn).  It would be inconsistent with this to change eg commit to
default to 'commit .'.

-- 
Martin <http://launchpad.net/~mbp/>