Re: Can anyone correct the Bazaar reference "revno:111954.1.97"?

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> From: Joshua Judson Rosen <rozzin@geekspace.com>
> Cc: esr@thyrsus.com (Eric S. Raymond),  handa@gnu.org,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2014 16:35:35 -0500
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> >
> > > From: esr@thyrsus.com (Eric S. Raymond)
> > > Date: Sat,  1 Mar 2014 12:13:37 -0500 (EST)
> > > 
> > > Here's the context:
> > > 
> > >     revno: 111954.1.4
> > >     committer: K. Handa <handa@gnu.org>
> > >     branch nick: work
> > >     timestamp: Fri 2013-03-22 00:18:44 +0900
> > >     message:
> > >       Fix a bug introduced by revno:111954.1.97
> > > 
> > > It doesn't show up in a bzr log --levels=0 listing, and the fact that
> > > 97 > 4 suggests the reference is garbled.
> >
> > I think the correct reference is 111964.1.6.  It was merged in
> > r112051.
> 
> ... and the "revno:111954.1.97" was a reference to trunk revno:112051.

No, it isn't, IMO: they have different parents.

> The fact that the commit whose comment is making that reference is itself
> from a non-mainline branch suggests that the reference may actually
> not be garbled, but rather be from an obsolete context.
> 
> The "111954.1.97" revno is actually correct relative to the "111954.1.4"
> commit and Handa's "work branch" (where it would have been 111954+4=11958;
> if you do "bzr branch trunk -r 111954.1.4 handa-work" and then do
> "bzr log -r 111954.1.97 --show-ids handa-work", this starts to become clear).

Unless you are saying that Handa-san used two different branches that
both forked at trunk r111954, I don't see how .1.97 can come before
.1.4 on the same branch.

In any case, what we need is references to revisions recorded in Emacs
bzr repo, not in foreign private branches, I hope you agree.