RFC: bzr rm is hard to use

[Robert Collins]

On Fri, 2009-07-17 at 13:57 +0100, Ewan Milne wrote:
> > It also looks to me if option 1 is winning and is closer to what we
> > have now, but not everybody agrees.
> > In the end there can be only one default, so we have to choose.
> 
> I might be misreading the thread, but it seems to me that option 2 has
> more support?
> 
> Perhaps this is my interpretation because it is the option I favour
> ;-) It seems very important to me to have symmetry between add and
> remove, so that by default bzr rm should not remove the file from the
> filesystem. As demonstrated by Ian:
> 
> >  bzr add foo
> >  (damn, didn't mean that)
> >  bzr rm foo

My proposal doesn't remove it either (because of the 'like revert' rule,
and revert in this case won't remove it).

-Rob
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20090717/e201acab/attachment-0001.pgp