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: Latest merge from the emacs-23 branch Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 21:22:03 +0200 Message-ID: <83wrn8fbms.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83zks4fkua.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1292614632 5045 80.91.229.12 (17 Dec 2010 19:37:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 19:37:12 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Andreas Schwab Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Dec 17 20:37:07 2010 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PTg6x-0003bW-2C for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 20:37:03 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54558 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PTfse-0000J0-14 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 14:22:16 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=48685 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PTfsO-0000HB-Df for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 14:22:01 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PTfsN-000182-7L for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 14:22:00 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout21.012.net.il ([80.179.55.169]:57905) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PTfsM-00017r-UB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 14:21:59 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout21.012.net.il by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LDL00B006YGC700@a-mtaout21.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 21:21:57 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.229.167.122]) by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LDL00BQE74K3080@a-mtaout21.012.net.il>; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 21:21:57 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.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:133772 Archived-At: > From: Andreas Schwab > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 19:19:30 +0100 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > The latest merge, which created revision 102642 on the trunk, shows a > > lot of revisions from the branch as merged (to see them, try something > > like "bzr log --line -c102642 -n0"), but at least some of them are not > > actually included in the merge. Here are a few examples: > > > > 99634.2.670: Eli Zaretskii 2010-12-11 Fix bug #7398 with truncated glyphs... > > 99634.2.664: Glenn Morris 2010-12-11 [Backport from trunk]: * make-dist: E... > > 99634.2.658: Eli Zaretskii 2010-12-09 Fix bug #1077 with popping new frame... > > > > These revisions indeed should not have been merged to the trunk, but > > why do they show in Bazaar's merge log? > > That's the difference between merging and cherry picking. Cherry-picking is not recorded in the history, so it cannot explain the extra records. Merging and _then_reverse_cherry-picking_ can, but I'd like Stefan to respond, because only he knows what he did. More importantly, I'd like to know if this was an accident or something that can and will be improved, or this is how merges between branches will look like from now on.