Code review comment for lp:~vila/bzr/conflict-manager

>>>>> "jam" == John A Meinel <email address hidden> writes:

<snip/>

    jam> We seem a bit confused as to whether 'bzr resolve' is a
    jam> command that has actions, or whether it is a command
    jam> that records actions you've already done.

Yes. It's surprising. But 'resolved', which reflects more closely
the actual behavior is already declared as an alias.

    jam> I'm worried that this takes it a step further. (resolve
    jam> --interactive is quite different from what 'resolve'
    jam> does today.)

Well, it literally resolves the conflict instead of just deleting
it (and I abandon the --interactive idea in favor of handling a
list of files (as resolve was already), GUIs may choose
differently but at least the command line UI provides the basis).

So it makes sense to use 'resolve' for the actions and 'resolved'
for just marking the conflicts as resolved.

But then, in 99% of the actions you also want to mark the
conflict as resolved !

In the end, I considered that I was providing more ways to
resolve the conflicts than the actual --done action.

    jam> I'm wondering if we should be considering how to split
    jam> out the current functionality into separate commands...

Well, we currently have: bzr resolve [--auto] {--all|FILE+}.

There is not much that will be lost except that the magic
behavior associated with --auto (disabled when you use --all)
will become explicit.

Do you have better names to propose ?

   Vincent