Re: Strange message from "bzr pull"

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2009 22:09:02 +0200
> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> Cc: lekktu@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> 
> > From: Karl Fogel <kfogel@red-bean.com>
> > 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 what, if any, changes in the bzr configuration and in the workflow
documented on the wiki would be necessary if the trunk/ tree is used
for small one-off fixes?

I understand that by binding this branch to the remote repository, we
actually made it a checkout.  Therefore, "bzr pull" that is documented
on the wiki will only work if I have no local changes that are not
committed to the central repository; otherwise, I need to use "bzr update",
is that right?  If so, perhaps it's better to say on the wiki that
"bzr update" be always used in trunk/, because it will always work, no
matter if the mirror diverged or not?

Next, what is this public_branch directive in .bzr/branch/branch.conf.
Its documentation in the manual is abysmally inadequate, but it sounds
like it is only used in "bzr send"?  If so, making changes in trunk/
does not need to change this (or any other) line in branch.conf, is
that right?

Any other consequences I missed?

TIA