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: Confusing "bzr log" as result of merges Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 11:44:46 +0300 Message-ID: <83fwo8fnnl.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83ipt4fqyy.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1305967495 24817 80.91.229.12 (21 May 2011 08:44:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 08:44:55 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Andreas Schwab Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat May 21 10:44:51 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QNhnm-00088i-N6 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 21 May 2011 10:44:51 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43589 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QNhnl-0000Bq-VL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 21 May 2011 04:44:49 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:37490) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QNhni-0000Ba-Rx for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 21 May 2011 04:44:47 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QNhnh-00044w-4K for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 21 May 2011 04:44:46 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout21.012.net.il ([80.179.55.169]:45680) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QNhng-00044l-UR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 21 May 2011 04:44:45 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout21.012.net.il by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LLJ00H00EX36H00@a-mtaout21.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 21 May 2011 11:44:42 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.124.254.13]) by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LLJ00G60EYHZA30@a-mtaout21.012.net.il>; Sat, 21 May 2011 11:44:42 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 80.179.55.169 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:139571 Archived-At: > From: Andreas Schwab > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 10:36:57 +0200 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > And why was 99634.2.937 merged to the trunk, even though the log > > message clearly says it's a backport? If we avoid merging such > > backported revisions, will this problem go away? > > A merge always includes all parent revisions. There is no way to "avoid > merging a backported revision". Maybe with git. With bzr, "merge" accepts a switch that can specify revisions to merge. IOW, revision 100577 on the emacs-23 branch could have been omitted from the merge, because its log message says it's a backport.