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 13:29:29 +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> <873a2gkh0n.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <838wc8bxft.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1262954227 27227 80.91.229.12 (8 Jan 2010 12:37:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 12:37:07 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ofv@wanadoo.es, "Stephen J. Turnbull" , 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-JK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 13:36:58 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42304 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NTDzw-0008Bn-2K for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 07:31:24 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NTDyY-00078e-4S for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 07:29:58 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NTDyT-00072k-9o for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 07:29:57 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=58987 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NTDyT-00072P-1d for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 07:29:53 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-bw0-f215.google.com ([209.85.218.215]:50344) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NTDyQ-0002yB-Sm; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 07:29:51 -0500 Original-Received: by bwz7 with SMTP id 7so13292463bwz.26 for ; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 04:29:49 -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; bh=HRBFrFzRmxwTn09jT9vZJU6W0ju1LZR1DDfrmON0Jks=; b=X6WGUjNem55uHGhDcteOoLrQ9Ff704CUzzrouPWm0KveC4VHKVYFmWdl0GZMI9BEWi GwB9mSPmMV3vqdiS4NP81PpCk/RUPF2IOLJB2PUwgTrPPHJyI9Myrt8q51S/UnDp/nLB X3IAYgy12zi7JhsbRu3Sql1xWQys7lLoVRpQQ= 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; b=Ui9GiNY2aqB6LKMHBCTzkByLfk/LvRojW3LxpwHs0xQSvkS+nkbtH+Fpbxv02ks1m7 n6dFTfbe2sVnT6yodItpI+nZM3RaArdMUnXNLvaSCdRc3cwVV2fsm3gH9iUoOgGvViyu PGkBfl2Go3j9vO7JYqOPF6+SGNm22EGlD4gCI= Original-Received: by 10.204.14.82 with SMTP id f18mr6006731bka.204.1262953789221; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 04:29:49 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <838wc8bxft.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:119678 Archived-At: On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 13:20, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> By removing the pointer to the parents in the microbranch along with >> the merge marker, the history (metadata) recorded in the microbranch >> becomes inaccessible (in Lisp terms, garbage). > > What is a microbranch? The history of a branch that gets committed with a merge; the history you get with "log -n0" for merge commits. > So it's a way to pretend that a series of changes on a branch is a > single change that brings you to the last revision on that branch, is > that right? If you do merge followed by revert --pending-merges, yes. You can selectively choose changes with "merge -c". > "revert --forget-merges" > forgets the whole commit, not just its commit message, so it seems to > throw out the baby with the bathwater. Again, it "forgets" the commits (in the original branch), but you don't have to do it all at once. Juanma