From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Merging emacs-23 into trunk Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 19:21:43 +0200 Message-ID: <837hglf61k.fsf@gnu.org> References: Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1289410317 6362 80.91.229.12 (10 Nov 2010 17:31:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 17:31:57 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 10 18:31:52 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 1PGEWW-0002iU-9I for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 18:31:52 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48799 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PGENC-0004zX-CK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 12:22:14 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=57796 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PGEMt-0004sm-9F for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 12:21:57 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PGEMm-0006vX-NU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 12:21:50 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout23.012.net.il ([80.179.55.175]:54168) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PGEMm-0006uh-En for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 12:21:48 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout23.012.net.il by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LBO00800IUTGY00@a-mtaout23.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 19:21:43 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.126.249.126]) by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LBO0070QIW5W9F0@a-mtaout23.012.net.il>; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 19:21:43 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) 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:132516 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Monnier > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 10:46:02 -0500 > > bzr merge -r A > bzr merge --force -r A..B > > While I do expect the two to behave differently w.r.t conflicts (or in > the case where A>B, say), I think the fact that the second does not > register the revisions from A to B in the "pending merges" data seems > like a bug to me. You are cherry-picking here; cherry-picking is explicitly not tracked in the history DAG. Why is that a problem, in the context of this discussion (merging from a release branch to the trunk)? > And the fact that > > bzr merge -r A > bzr merge --force -r B > > applies the A changes twice is another bug. I think this is again because cherry-picking is not tracked, so bzr doesn't "know" A is already there. In a nutshell, when you cherry-pick, you need to do your own bookkeeping.