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: emacs-w3m? Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 00:59:08 +0100 Message-ID: <87mxywzx2r.fsf@telefonica.net> References: <3E1D063D-AC8A-4E40-B9F8-6ACA5089C4A7@gmail.com> <873a0p1dqt.fsf@telefonica.net> <87r5o9yr4y.fsf@telefonica.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1267142397 18203 80.91.229.12 (25 Feb 2010 23:59:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 23:59:57 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Feb 26 00:59:51 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 1NkncN-0007kQ-Ci for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 26 Feb 2010 00:59:43 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54611 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NkncN-0007vO-1L for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 25 Feb 2010 18:59:43 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NkncH-0007v9-RC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Feb 2010 18:59:37 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=47609 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NkncG-0007ue-60 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Feb 2010 18:59:36 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NkncF-00076P-OV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Feb 2010 18:59:36 -0500 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:51152) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NkncF-00076C-Di for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Feb 2010 18:59:35 -0500 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Nknc4-0007YM-KR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Feb 2010 00:59:24 +0100 Original-Received: from 83.32.115.245 ([83.32.115.245]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 26 Feb 2010 00:59:24 +0100 Original-Received: from ofv by 83.32.115.245 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 26 Feb 2010 00:59:24 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 76 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 83.32.115.245 User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.92 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:VZ+QnXUArDeoghA6vgrAVEQQtds= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.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:121377 Archived-At: bob@gnu.org (Robert J. Chassell) writes: > Definitely, those files were added with `bzr add'. You did it > inadvertently. > > I did not. Yes, you did. Bazaar does not add files without being told so. > I did a commit and the command must have moved W3M mode > files in my running Emacs to the master, which I did not intend. Why is > that? Without knowing the precise steps you follow, it's hard to tell. > How do I commit one file? That's explained on http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/BzrQuickStartForEmacsDevs which supposedly you are using as a guide. The command is bzr commit one-file another-file ... but if some of the files are not versioned yet, you need to add them first: bzr add one-file this is why I say that you did a `bzr add' before the commit (this or your bzr version has a tremendous bug, but I think that that is unlikely.) > Last time I looked, it wasn't a good idea to mix the instructions of > those documents. Stick to one or another, but not both. > > Where in BzrForEmacsDevs and BzrQuickStartForEmacsDevs does it say that > you should not commit? The command is in both. (I am serious; > remember, those who wrote BzrForEmacsDevs and BzrQuickStartForEmacsDevs > tried to explain Bazaar and I thought they did a good job.) I'm being serious too. You say that you are following the instructions of *both* documents. And I insist on that you should pick just one. > > What are the `unthinkable' ways of removing unwanted files? > > I'm not sure I understand your question. With bzr, you do `bzr > uncommit --revision N'. DON'T EVER DO THAT ON A PUBLIC BRANCH ... > just in case that setting's implementation has bugs, don't try it. > > OK, I won't. Are you saying that no one has a low-probability-of-error > method in bzr that removes mistakes? As Leo said, > > ... if this mistake can happen so easily it will happen again > > which is true. As explained here on the past, pretending to correct an error on bzr is similar to pretending to correct an error on a e-mail you sent to a public mailing list. For fixing typos on commit messages and other meta-information, some tools have mechanisms for amending one commit with another commit, but the first commit remains there. As for the mistakes, yes, they happen. We need to try hard to not incur on them, but they will happen anyways. In this case, a simple `bzr diff' just before committing would spit a diff 100 K-lines long and you would notice that something was wrong. If erroneous commits turns to be a serious problem, we could set up a gatekeeper(*), although that workflow is a bit more complex than what we have now. * http://doc.bazaar.canonical.com/bzr.2.1/en/user-guide/using_gatekeepers.html