Re: [Monotone-devel] [bikeshed] once more on bookkeeping dirs...

[Derek Scherger]

Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> svn has a special hack to let you change, etc.  So, since 0.26 isn't
> coming out for at least a week anyway (stupid end-of-term), I'd sort

I seriously think we should decouple the renaming of things from the 
0.26 release. Since all of this is so bike-shed-y anyhow, there's no 
sense rushing into something silly for the sake of this one, already 
big, release. None of what we've seen is any better, or any worse, than 
what we already have. People will probably complain either way but since 
there isn't much in the way of consensus perhaps the status quo is the 
right thing for now.

> of like to hear more opinions on this, to get a sense of the community
> feeling...
>
> The essence is: do we want the bookkeeping dir to something like:
>   _MTN
>   _mtn
>   .MTN \__ If one of these names, also specify what the configuration
>   .mtn /   dir in ~ should be called
>   .MTN-bookkeeping \__ or other less stupid suffixes accepted
>   .mtn-bookkeeping /   too

How many complaints about MT have we heard? I don't really like the "_" 
prefix or "-longish-suffix" things, but I don't have any problem with MT 
or MTN or MTO or MMM. Visible doesn't seem to be a bad thing and it's 
worked for CVS for 20+ years. My second vote would be for .FOO for 
whaterver FOO we land on but I realize that this causes problems for 
visual studio or some other equally silly tool.

On another, somewhat related note, I once looked at what it would take 
to load ~/.monotone/monotonerc first and possibly use it to determine 
where the book keeping (should we call it admin) dir lives. This seems 
very do-able and would potentially allow people to call this thing 
whatever they want or move it away from the workspace entirely.

Cheers,
Derek