Re: Strange response after merge from upstream

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Eli Zaretskii writes:

 > How is "merge --pull" different from merge followed by commit? 
 > would it avoid the "1 extra revision" in the output of "missing"?

Maybe.

- "bzr merge" always merges, and you must commit.
- "bzr pull" does a trivial merge and commit if your local branch's
  tip revision is an ancestor of the remote revision, otherwise it
  aborts without changing anything.  (A successful pull is also called
  a "fast forward".)
- "bzr merge --pull" does the equivalent of "bzr pull" if possible,
  otherwise it does "bzr merge".  This means you will have to commit
  separately when your local branch contains unpushed changes even if
  you get a clean merge; only for a fast forward do you avoid the
  commit step.

The above assumes there are no uncommitted local changes.  If there
are, all of the above commands abort without doing anything.