From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Latest merge from the emacs-23 branch Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 17:03:01 -0500 Message-ID: References: <83zks4fkua.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1292623400 14607 80.91.229.12 (17 Dec 2010 22:03:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 22:03:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Dec 17 23:03:13 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 1PTiOO-0001zU-E0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 23:03:12 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38251 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PTiOO-0001b7-3b for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 17:03:12 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=54886 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PTiOJ-0001aj-Fb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 17:03:08 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PTiOH-0002rd-UU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 17:03:07 -0500 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.181]:35517 helo=ironport2-out.pppoe.ca) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PTiOG-0002pp-D6; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 17:03:04 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAORsC03O+KHE/2dsb2JhbACkMXS/bYVKBIRljhE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.60,190,1291611600"; d="scan'208";a="85759197" Original-Received: from 206-248-161-196.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO ceviche.home) ([206.248.161.196]) by ironport2-out.pppoe.ca with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 17 Dec 2010 17:03:02 -0500 Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id C923A66112; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 17:03:01 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <83zks4fkua.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Fri, 17 Dec 2010 18:03:09 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. 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:133776 Archived-At: > The latest merge, which created revision 102642 on the trunk, shows a > lot of revisions from the branch as merged (to see them, try something > like "bzr log --line -c102642 -n0"), but at least some of them are not > actually included in the merge. Here are a few examples: > 99634.2.670: Eli Zaretskii 2010-12-11 Fix bug #7398 with truncated glyphs... > 99634.2.664: Glenn Morris 2010-12-11 [Backport from trunk]: * make-dist: E... > 99634.2.658: Eli Zaretskii 2010-12-09 Fix bug #1077 with popping new frame... > These revisions indeed should not have been merged to the trunk, but > why do they show in Bazaar's merge log? That will certainly > complicate future forensics, I think. Cherrypicking is unworkable since it means doing all the history-tracking by hand. So the "merge from emacs-23" is *really* a merge. I'm not sure what you mean by "some of them are not actually included in the merge", tho. AFAIK they are included in the sense that the corresponding change is now present on the trunk. Stefan