[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: log format for vc-bzr
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: log format for vc-bzr |
Date: |
Fri, 08 Jan 2010 14:20:06 +0200 |
> From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden>
> Cc: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=D3scar?= Fuentes <address@hidden>,
> address@hidden
> Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2010 19:50:00 +0900
>
> Eli Zaretskii writes:
>
> > --forget-merges
> > Remove pending merge marker, without changing any files.
> >
> > What is a ``pending merge marker''?
>
> A "pending merge" is a merge that you have started with "bzr merge"
> (or perhaps a "bzr pull" that resulted in a conflict) but not yet
> finished with "bzr commit".
Terrific! So I just did a merge, but it is still considered
``pending''? Who could have thought of a more confusing semantics??
(Please don't take this as aimed at you, Stephen; I will shortly say
the same on the Bazaar list.)
> > And how removing it resolves the problem at hand?
>
> By removing the pointer to the parents in the microbranch along with
> the merge marker, the history (metadata) recorded in the microbranch
> becomes inaccessible (in Lisp terms, garbage).
What is a microbranch?
> The "real" history (files changed by the merge operation) is not
> touched, and so the content changes, but not the historical
> metadata, is recorded in the upcoming commit.
So it's a way to pretend that a series of changes on a branch is a
single change that brings you to the last revision on that branch, is
that right?
If so, then I think it's not what I thought it would do. This
sub-thread started from ttn's comment that "Unrestrained publishing of
personal junk is bad manners." But ``personal junk'' can only be in
the commit messages, much less in the code. (It could, of course,
happen that I somehow commit a version with lots of debug printouts or
some such, but how is that ``personal junk''?) "revert --forget-merges"
forgets the whole commit, not just its commit message, so it seems to
throw out the baby with the bathwater.
Or am I missing something?
Anyway, thanks for the explanations.
> > And if this is the magic wand to leave personal commit comments out
> > of the public repository, then shouldn't we add this to the
> > recommended workflow on the wiki?
>
> It's a wiki ....
Yes, but it states a policy, so I won't want to make such changes
unless they are agreed to.
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, (continued)
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Juanma Barranquero, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Juanma Barranquero, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Andreas Schwab, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Juanma Barranquero, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Thien-Thi Nguyen, 2010/01/08
- bzr Q&A [was Re: log format for vc-bzr], Glenn Morris, 2010/01/08
- Re: bzr Q&A [was Re: log format for vc-bzr], Eli Zaretskii, 2010/01/09
- bzr Q&A [was Re: log format for vc-bzr], Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/01/09
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Juanma Barranquero, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/01/09
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Miles Bader, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/01/08