Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Making microbranches popular

[Tom Lord]

    > From: Chris Mason <address@hidden>
    > On Mon, 2004-01-26 at 19:38, Tom Lord wrote:

    > >     > > Is the inevitable resulting user confusion really worth it?

    > >     > I think when you start munging names like this, user confusion is
    > >     > inevitable :(

    > > That's the #1 reason why I resist changes like this.   We have a
    > > perfectly servicable namespace right now with a clear structure.
    > > It's all downhill from here.   And, for what?  An imperfect support
    > > for "arbitrary names"?

    > > (The current namespace is slightly spoiled by the (historic)
    > > permissability of empty branch names.  That was a mistake, early on.)

    > It's about making arch available (and easy) to use on existing
    > projects.  Flexibility is key, it's probably enough to just allow an
    > arbitrary association between some name and a real arch revision.

Details matter, man.   

Association with what scope?  Per-user?  Per-archive?  Gobal?

And to an "arch revision" -- really?  others seem to want at least
aliases for versions.   Branches can't be far behind.

Flexibility at what cost?   New server roundtrips?

Should this just effect command lines?  What about output from
commands?

-t