[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 14:52:54 +0200 |
> From: Juanma Barranquero <address@hidden>
> Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 13:24:29 +0100
> Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden
>
> On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 13:01, Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> > Thanks, but isn't this in the direction that is opposite of the one
> > for which it was suggested? I though you are supposed to use it
> > _on_the_trunk_, after merging from a branch. But you seem to show it
> > in the other direction, which confuses this issue even more, at least
> > for me.
>
> I don't know what in my message (other than my usual clarity or lack
> of it) makes you think that.
You ran "bzr status" in the trunk, that's why. Sorry.
> > So its effect is similar to that of rebasing?
>
> Humm, no. Leaving aside uncommited changes, conflicts, etc., rebase
> un-applies some commits, updates the branch, and reapplies these
> commits as if they were new. "revert --pending-changes" is done on a
> branch that has just been the target of a merge, and affects changes
> that have not yet been committed.
But isn't the effect on the resulting revision DAG very similar?
> > But the issue at hand was how to hide personal comments in the commit
> > messages, not how to hide some of the intermediate changes. Why would
> > I want to do the latter?
>
> Sorry, I don't follow what do you mean with "personal comments" vs.
> "intermediate changes". I think Óscar meant that you have a branch
> with several commits, some of them meaningful, some of them of the
> "gone to lunch" variety, some reverting previous changes, etc.
Yes, I see that now, but if ttn called that ``personal junk'', then I
cannot disagree more. That's the history of my work; I don't see how
someone could object to having it in the public repository. Without
it, some changes, such as inadvertent merge mistakes, can never be
investigated and will remain a mystery forever.
I do understand that "revert --forget-merges" is one way of hiding
some of my changes from the public eye. But I don't see any
compelling use-case for that, except some marginal situations. OTOH,
my bzr experience with local branches is so short that my opinions
probably don't matter much. ;-)
Thanks.
- Re: reversion revulsion [was: log format for vc-bzr], (continued)
- Re: reversion revulsion [was: log format for vc-bzr], Óscar Fuentes, 2010/01/08
- Re: reversion revulsion [was: log format for vc-bzr], Eli Zaretskii, 2010/01/08
- Re: reversion revulsion, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/01/08
- Re: reversion revulsion, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/01/08
- Re: reversion revulsion, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/01/08
- Re: reversion revulsion [was: log format for vc-bzr], Juanma Barranquero, 2010/01/08
- Re: reversion revulsion [was: log format for vc-bzr], Juanma Barranquero, 2010/01/08
- 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,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- 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, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Juanma Barranquero, 2010/01/08