From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: reversion revulsion [was: log format for vc-bzr] Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2010 12:21:02 +0100 Message-ID: <87d41kdeqp.fsf@telefonica.net> References: <200912081747.nB8HlwPR021836@godzilla.ics.uci.edu> <874oo1w9y1.fsf@telefonica.net> <87tyw1uss6.fsf@telefonica.net> <200912082203.nB8M3FLP023771@godzilla.ics.uci.edu> <87hbs1at4u.fsf@notengoamigos.org> <871vj3sxgy.fsf@telefonica.net> <87ws0vrd46.fsf@telefonica.net> <87hbqxa9ti.fsf@ambire.localdomain> <87k4vtd1uy.fsf@telefonica.net> <83ljg9as4g.fsf@gnu.org> <87wrzszz4y.fsf_-_@ambire.localdomain> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1262949730 13037 80.91.229.12 (8 Jan 2010 11:22:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 11:22:10 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jan 08 12:22:03 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 4.50) id 1NTCuo-0008L0-Lq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 12:22:02 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33255 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NTCup-0001LH-3a for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 06:22:03 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NTCuW-0001IE-D5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 06:21:44 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NTCuR-0001Gi-In for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 06:21:43 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=42460 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NTCuQ-0001GV-7t for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 06:21:38 -0500 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:56635) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NTCuP-0004oA-Jy for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 06:21:37 -0500 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1NTCuJ-0008BT-PM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 12:21:31 +0100 Original-Received: from 180.red-83-36-171.dynamicip.rima-tde.net ([83.36.171.180]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 12:21:31 +0100 Original-Received: from ofv by 180.red-83-36-171.dynamicip.rima-tde.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 12:21:31 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 56 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 180.red-83-36-171.dynamicip.rima-tde.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.90 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:7ZCQ6EeQARJ73enmm8HQppNIu2Y= X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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:119670 Archived-At: Thien-Thi Nguyen writes: > As usual, the Bazaar documentation doesn't say anything > about this option that can be grokked by Bazaar non-experts. > > --forget-merges > Remove pending merge marker, without changing any files. > > What is a ``pending merge marker''? And how removing it > resolves the problem at hand? And if this is the magic wand > to leave personal commit comments out of the public > repository, then shouldn't we add this to the recommended > workflow on the wiki? > > I'm concerned that mis- (or any, actually) use of "bzr revert" > in trunk/ (as opposed to in quickfixes/) will do some damage > upstream, in the sense that any change that discards (shared) > history is an ugly mistake. > > That's just from a correctness pov. I dread the performance > implications of having to do (and possibly screwing up): > > cd .../trunk # 0 > bzr update # 1 > bzr merge ../quickfixes # 2 > bzr commit # 3 > bzr revert --forget-merges # 4 > > IIUC step 3 publishes, as does step 4, defeating atomicity. Nope, you have steps 3 and 4 reversed. `bzr revert' does not modify committed history. Maybe you are confusing it with `bzr uncommit', which NEVER should be used in trunk/? > Really, i would be much happier to see "bzr revert" prohibited > entirely on > or wherever such policy lives, and see local branch history > suppression effected in step 2 in the merge proper. That is > where i want to express "merge quickfixes/ changes, allowing > manual editing of a new comment (log entry) seeded with the > log entries of the quickfixes/ changes, but in the end > *discarding* those log entries". > > More succinctly: Can bzr do what "git merge --squash" does? >From my careless reading of `git help merge', I think that bzr merge bzr revert --forget-merges does that, or something very similar. -- Óscar Fuentes Desarrollo de Software