Hi, There have been a lot of discussion on this list about the output format of "bzr status", whether it's good or not...
I should be able to implement a bzr-status into DVC rather soon, and I'd like to know how much I can rely on the output format. (I gave up with pymacs, not being able to do asynchronous calls is a blocking problem, and up to now, I didn't have problem with the command-line interface). Implementing a parser for this format in Emacs-lisp is not a problem. Internationalization can be a problem, but I can call bzr with "LANG=C bzr ...". The only problem is that I don't want to hardcode this format in my lisp code if it may change in the future, so if the probability of a change is high, I'll write a python wrapper that has a fixed output format. [ People not interested in DVC can stop here ;-) ] I think I'll implement bzr status in a way similar to what Xtla does for M-x baz-lint RET : display in a buffer something that looks like the output of "bzr status" (but after parsing it and rebuilding it so that further manipulation is easier). Operations on a file entry will apply to this file, and operations on a group name (modified:, unknown:, ...) will apply to all the files in this group. The idea is to provide the user an interface similar to the command line, so using DVC-bzr should teach the user how to use bzr, but it also provides more features and an integration in Emacs. Thanks for your comments, -- Matthieu
