From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andreas Schwab Newsgroups: gmane.comp.version-control.bazaar-ng.general,gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs Bazaar repository Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 15:30:21 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87skyvse7k.fsf@xmission.com> <86ejae96t4.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> <47DA3601.3040507@arbash-meinel.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1205505044 16816 80.91.229.12 (14 Mar 2008 14:30:44 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 14:30:44 +0000 (UTC) Cc: bazaar@lists.canonical.com, Eli Zaretskii , dak@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Matthieu Moy Original-X-From: bazaar-bounces@lists.canonical.com Fri Mar 14 15:31:12 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvbg-bazaar-ng@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from chlorine.canonical.com ([91.189.94.204]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JaAw2-0005hB-OB for gcvbg-bazaar-ng@m.gmane.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 15:31:02 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=chlorine.canonical.com) by chlorine.canonical.com with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JaAvT-0008Aj-Qi; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 14:30:27 +0000 Original-Received: from ns2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15] helo=mx2.suse.de) by chlorine.canonical.com with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JaAvO-00089S-Kt for bazaar@lists.canonical.com; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 14:30:22 +0000 Original-Received: from Relay2.suse.de (mail2.suse.de [195.135.221.8]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C6D63A8D2; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 15:30:22 +0100 (CET) X-Yow: Has everybody got HALVAH spread all over their ANKLES??... Now, it's time to ``HAVE A NAGEELA''!! In-Reply-To: (Matthieu Moy's message of "Fri\, 14 Mar 2008 15\:13\:20 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: bazaar@lists.canonical.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.8 Precedence: list List-Id: bazaar discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bazaar-bounces@lists.canonical.com Errors-To: bazaar-bounces@lists.canonical.com Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.version-control.bazaar-ng.general:38578 gmane.emacs.devel:92559 Archived-At: Matthieu Moy writes: > As opposed to that, bzr makes the distinction between "mainline > revisions" (that you commited in the branch), and merged revisions > (ancestors of merge commits that you brought here with a merge). Is that a useful distinction? I think git treats all branches equal, there is no "mainline". If you merge two branches that touch different parts of the tree there is no need to distinguish the two threads. > That's a real difference in the way git and bzr deal with the history > DAG, not just about "log". For example, git merge defaults to > fast-forward (i.e. if you merge a revision you are a direct ancestor > of, you just jump to that revision without creating a new commit). If you just move forward in the history it is not really a merge, so there should not be a need for creating a marker for it. Andreas. --=20 Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de SuSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstra=DFe 5, 90409 N=FCrnberg, Germany PGP key fingerprint =3D 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED= 5 "And now for something completely different."