Re: base

[Uday S Reddy <u.s.reddy@cs.bham.ac.uk>]

On 8/25/2010 1:19 AM, Miles Bader wrote:

> I think it's related to bzr being inconsistent, complicated, and
> confusing, with no simple mental model for users to latch onto, and
> multiple operating modes poorly stitched together (it's not really clear
> what bzr wants to be; sometimes it seems like its trying to be
> everything at once -- and, predictably, failing at all as a result).

The criticism is understandable, but I don't think it is true.

I think simplicity was a key design goal of Bazaar.  The attitude is that you 
don't have to understand how everything works.  Just use these basic commands 
and we will take care of making it all work.  That explains why the 
documentation is so meager.  It also explains why they are so opposed to adding 
things like rebase, which require the users to have a deeper understanding of 
the process to use them correctly.

My feeling is that Bazaar is mostly successful in delivering that simplicity. 
As a software guy, I can admire that.  But also, as a software guy, I really 
want to know what is going on.  That is where the problem is.  I can't be sure, 
but the problem could probably be solved by somebody writing down a more 
in-depth manual of Bazaar.

But I haven't seen any evidence that Bazaar is bad software.  If I think that 
something should be possible and try it, either it gets rejected or it just 
works.  I learn something along the way.  There is a place for software like 
that in the bigger scheme of things.

Cheers,
Uday