Re: vc-update for bzr etc.

[Dan Nicolaescu <dann@gnu.org>]

Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com> writes:

> [I sent this yesterday, but the message didn't show up; resending.]
>
> From vc.el:
>
> ;; - vc-update/vc-merge should deal with VC systems that don't
> ;;   update/merge on a file basis, but on a whole repository basis.
> ;;   vc-update and vc-merge assume the arguments are always files,
> ;;   they don't deal with directories.  Make sure the *vc-dir* buffer
> ;;   is updated after these operations.
> ;;   At least bzr, git and hg should benefit from this.
>
> Here's a quick stab at this.  If a backend defines vc-BACK-merge-news
> (svn and cvs), vc-update tries a per-file update unless a prefix
> argument is supplied.  Otherwise, it tries vc-BACK-update-repository, a
> new VC backend function.  Included is an implementation for bzr,
> vc-bzr-update-repository, which runs asynchronously and outputs to a
> *vc-update* buffer (currently Fundamental mode, but can be improved).
>
> Thoughts?  

IMHO there's a benefit from implementing vc-pull/push operations.
Then vc-update can use vc-pull after maybe asking a few questions.
The pull/push terminology is what people are currently used to, so
it's easier for end users.
[Incidentally merge-news used by VC probably means close to nothing to almost anyone].

> Any subtleties here that I'm missing?

Updating the all the files and buffers after this operation.