From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Juanma Barranquero Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: log format for vc-bzr Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 13:24:29 +0100 Message-ID: References: <200912081747.nB8HlwPR021836@godzilla.ics.uci.edu> <871vj3sxgy.fsf@telefonica.net> <87ws0vrd46.fsf@telefonica.net> <87hbqxa9ti.fsf@ambire.localdomain> <87k4vtd1uy.fsf@telefonica.net> <83ljg9as4g.fsf@gnu.org> <83bph4byb6.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1262954226 27224 80.91.229.12 (8 Jan 2010 12:37:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 12:37:06 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ofv@wanadoo.es, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jan 08 13:36:59 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 1NTE5K-0008H6-Uw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 13:36:59 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33949 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NTDu6-0002zI-Sq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 07:25:22 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NTDth-0002px-Ri for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 07:24:57 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NTDtc-0002nd-UB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 07:24:57 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=46525 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NTDtc-0002nW-PU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 07:24:52 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-bw0-f215.google.com ([209.85.218.215]:61822) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NTDta-00019f-Ed; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 07:24:50 -0500 Original-Received: by bwz7 with SMTP id 7so13290131bwz.26 for ; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 04:24:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=G5c1lNqydG/OdrbLsatVg+OS1dVWWIwNlwW3IBzT22U=; b=BTfxf3YBd08DHIHmq5XnHW4SxhPjM3w8HG3YhqjTsylwaYUlaaa40ZF/X9U4+KdJOL Hf7BF23KCGTQ9tU0dFBGqrzOha30e3cX6NoJEKDxAjJfbuMLFgxk2TgNJAX8hf+IAthz 2/0uJbpM9kS3X2ZJIZEjQk8nP7OW55L+kIUyA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=dysF+Gj5iqRYdq3r96hwVBUj2Vh/gDzYT3aEac+5iTiRDatAdaYbbfG5Ky9dxuC3ja r9Sdv62AP+tKfPZ/i02D4NatD9ICzDfvt+p4ei/TnQUhN4HJYLuxbqu0rmLJdkPZVrDG aQ7dOOtkRyFFkMg2DBo1StJV/UbH6j6Wim8co= Original-Received: by 10.204.18.18 with SMTP id u18mr7651798bka.107.1262953489254; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 04:24:49 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <83bph4byb6.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) 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:119677 Archived-At: On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 13:01, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Thanks, but isn't this in the direction that is opposite of the one > for which it was suggested? =C2=A0I though you are supposed to use it > _on_the_trunk_, after merging from a branch. =C2=A0But you seem to show i= t > in the other direction, which confuses this issue even more, at least > for me. I don't know what in my message (other than my usual clarity or lack of it) makes you think that. I was talking about cd your-branch # hack hack hack bzr commit -m "..." cd ../trunk bzr merge ../your-branch bzr revert --pending-merges bzr commit -m "un-merged changes" > So its effect is similar to that of rebasing? Humm, no. Leaving aside uncommited changes, conflicts, etc., rebase un-applies some commits, updates the branch, and reapplies these commits as if they were new. "revert --pending-changes" is done on a branch that has just been the target of a merge, and affects changes that have not yet been committed. > But the issue at hand was how to hide personal comments in the commit > messages, not how to hide some of the intermediate changes. =C2=A0Why wou= ld > I want to do the latter? Sorry, I don't follow what do you mean with "personal comments" vs. "intermediate changes". I think =C3=93scar meant that you have a branch with several commits, some of them meaningful, some of them of the "gone to lunch" variety, some reverting previous changes, etc., and you can use merge (and in particular merge -c or merge -r) to move commits to another branch, de-merge them (with revert --forget-merges), fix them, and apply them to that new branch, so you can reconstruct in the second branch a history of the first branch totally to your liking (that including, of course, totally new commit messages, and dropping the ones you don't like, or squashing several original commits into one, splitting them, etc.). The result is similar to what you could do in git with rebase (and rebase -i), but less automatic. Juanma