Mark Hammond wrote:
Alexander writes:
Maybe there should be a generic "Update" item that "does
the right thing"?
...
As always, the main problem is defining what the "right thing" is.
...
Note the general confusion between people who you would expect would know (obviously including me). Note that last comment - it makes me concerned that, eg, exposing 'pull' on the default context menu of a checkout might be asking for trouble.
So while there is a use-case for using pull on a branch, is it a use-case Tortoise needs to cover? This isn't a rhetorical question - I'm searching for the answer - or failing that, the most suitable middle-ground :)
Thanks,
Mark
Getting the model right for TBZR is a big deal. And certainly we need to
decide on something for a first round, and see if it works, and possibly tweak
it later.
I would be hesitant to make TBZR too minimal, at the expense of not actually
allowing people to work the way they want to. TBZR is likely to become *the*
face of bzr on windows. And it would be good to play to our strengths. I'm
including the bzr mailing list, because I think this is a big enough deal to
warrant lots of people looking at it.
The best way I can think of, is to define specific models of workflow. And
either allow TBZR to be set up explicitly in each model, or to have it
configurable per project, or have them as separate menu entries, etc.
To give some examples:
1) Windows developer with minimal VCS experience, in an office, working in a
shared environment with high-speed access to the central server. I would have
two recommendations here:
a) A lightweight checkout model, very similar to how svn would work. The
'branch' command would create a new branch on the remote server, and
switch, etc would be used to point their local working tree around.
