Re: Merging emacs-23 into trunk

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

>> It's [...] scaringly slow (to some extent because of bzr's braindead
>> lack of support for merging into a tree that's not clean).

> I wanted to suggest "merge --force", but I see that you already tried
> that:

>> ;; Stupidly, "bzr merge --force -r A..B" dos not maintain the
>> ;; metadata properly except when the checkout is clean.
> Do you mean that "bzr merge --force" merges the text, but not the
> history?

Yes: it does merge the history but only in the case where the local tree
has no pending merges (in which case bzrmerge can just use "merge -r B")

I.e. the result of doing

    bzr merge -r B
    
is never the same as doing

    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.

And the fact that

    bzr merge -r A
    bzr merge --force -r B

applies the A changes twice is another bug.  Basically, "bzr merge"
completely ignores pending merges.  As does "bzr diff" (and probably
most/all other commands) BTW.


        Stefan