From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Strange message from "bzr pull" Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2009 22:09:02 +0200 Message-ID: <83d41xee5d.fsf@gnu.org> References: <877hs5ogv8.fsf@red-bean.com> <83my11ejmr.fsf@gnu.org> <87aax1mxh6.fsf@red-bean.com> <83hbr9eha3.fsf@gnu.org> <87ws05lhqg.fsf@red-bean.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1262117423 18890 80.91.229.12 (29 Dec 2009 20:10:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2009 20:10:23 +0000 (UTC) Cc: lekktu@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Karl Fogel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Dec 29 21:10:16 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1NPiOV-0003Fw-RE for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 29 Dec 2009 21:10:16 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42033 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NPiOW-0000wL-6e for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 29 Dec 2009 15:10:16 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NPiLC-00080d-Ph for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Dec 2009 15:06:50 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NPiL7-0007zC-Uu for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Dec 2009 15:06:50 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=58062 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NPiL7-0007z9-Pb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Dec 2009 15:06:45 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]:36768) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NPiL7-0005jG-7V for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Dec 2009 15:06:45 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0KVF00L00JTN5C00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Dec 2009 22:06:39 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.127.222.44]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0KVF00H7SJV20DC0@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Tue, 29 Dec 2009 22:06:39 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <87ws05lhqg.fsf@red-bean.com> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:118972 Archived-At: > From: Karl Fogel > Cc: lekktu@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2009 14:09:43 -0500 > > >OK. So, since we have this tree in trunk/, what are the reasons to > >keep it pristine, again? IOW, why not make quick and simple fixes in > >it directly, instead of in another branch? > > I *think* that would work fine (though I'm not 100% positive, since I > don't do it myself). > > The only reason I didn't document that is that if upstream gets new > changes while the local edits are being made, then one would have to > pull them in before committing -- because, as a bound branch, trunk is > not supposed to diverge from what it's bound to. But they might > conflict. Now your local trunk mirror is in a conflicted state. Yes, understood. But I didn't intend to make any serious changes there, just the ``one-offs''. If only one or two files are modified, things will not become too ugly, I think, even if there are conflicts. > So if you test it and it works, and no one thinks of any reason why it > could lead to bad history, then... go for it, I'd say. Will do, thanks.