Re: Installing changes from branches

[Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>]

> That is OK.  I didn't even know comments got merged like this.
> Isn't the real problem that bzr requires a commit in the quickfix branch
> after a merge?

Bzr doesn't require any such thing.  You decided to commit, not bzr.
That's linked to the fact that you decided to use "merge" rather than
"pull", i.e. use a separate branch.

> If you are doing some work that takes time, I find it easier to merge
> from the trunk from time to time, rather than taking a big hit at
> the end.

There are many different ways to do it.  I suggested a few in the part
of the message you elided:
- "For such changes, it's a lot better to just take the diff from the
  branch, apply to the trunk and commit".  That's what I do, as a matter
  of fact, and I have grown to like it, since this "diff&patch" is
  a good opportunity to rework/cleanup the patch one last time before
  committing it.
- "Or to use "bzr rebase" instead".
- "Another very good solution is to not use quickfix branches at all, but
  use shelves instead".

> Something like a collapsed merge would be good, i.e. merge from quickfix,
> but only record it as a single commit.

Indeed, you can also do that:

  cd .../trunk
  bzr merge .../quickfix
  bzr revert --forget-merges
  bzr commit ...

that's virtually the same as "diff&patch": it forgets all about the
branch's history.


        Stefan