Re: log format for vc-bzr

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> From: Óscar_Fuentes <ofv@wanadoo.es>
> Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2010 18:45:07 +0100
> 
> > Then the docs should have said "pending uncommitted merge results".
> >
> > IOW, the fact that there should be a commit after the merge is not the
> > reason to call the just-performed merge "pending".  The results of the
> > merge are pending commit, but the merge itself is no longer pending,
> > it was already done.
> 
> I disagree. The pending is not done until the corresponding revision is
> created and hence integrated on the history of the branch. That revision
> is the merge, not the source code changes that `bzr merge' created.
> 
> This is a about how to interpret certain terms. You are seeing the issue
> from the POV of a code writer who cares mostly about the state of the
> working tree. Me from the POV of somebody who is more fluent with the
> tool (bzr) and see things on terms of history points.

That's your mistake, right there: this is user documentation, not
documentation of bzr internals.  So it should take the POV of the user
who cares much less about the implementation than about the visible
effect.

It is this wrong POV that is one of the reasons that the current bzr
docs impose such a tremendous mental pressure on a novice who is
trying to make themselves fluent with the tool.