Re: Strange response after merge from upstream

[Óscar Fuentes]

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

>> merge -pull does this:
>> 
>> if branches-diverged?
>>   yes: merge  (you need to explicitly commit afterwards)
>>   no : pull   (no need to commit)
>> 
>> > would it avoid the "1 extra revision" in the output of "missing"?
>> 
>> Yes, because your quickfixes/ branch did not diverged from the branch
>> you pulled from, so it will do a `pull', like you did on your trunk
>> branch.
>
> Thanks, but it doesn't seem to work here: after "bzr pull" in trunk/
> and "bzr merge --pull" in quickfixes/, "bzr missing" still says that I
> "have 1 extra revision(s)" and cites the commit from yesterday.  That
> could be understandable, but it also says I'm "missing 27 revision(s)"
> and seems to show the changes just merged from the trunk.
>
> Does this happen because of yesterday's "commit" after "merge"?

Yes, for the 1 extra revision. I don't know from where come the missing
27 revisions if you already merged those.

You can see the stuff you merged on the last commit on quickfixes/ with

bzr log -n1 -l30

(show one level of merge history, 30 commits maximum)

See if the revisions listed there are the same `bzr missing' lists.

> Do I understand correctly that, to get rid of this, I need to "merge
> --pull" all the way, and even a single "merge; commit" will force the
> branches to diverge no matter what?

Yes.

> Is there a way of ``resyncing'' the branch with the trunk, so that
> "bzr missing" shows no missing/extra revisions?

Omitting the "27 missing revisions" and going back to the scenario you
described on your original post, a solution for this is to push that
extra revision into trunk. It is not the right solution, though, if your
`trunk' branch is intended to be a mirror of upstream's `trunk'. Other
solution is to uncommit, if you didn't commited more stuff to
quickfixes/ :

bzr uncommit
bzr revert

A brute-force solution is to delete the quickfixes/ branch (`rm -rf
quickfixes/' will do fine) and create another with the same name. This
is acceptable as far as you have no useful local commits there, of
course.

> Or did I do something wrong?

It depends. Sometimes the right thing is to pull, sometimes you want to
merge. For your local mirror of upstream's trunk, you always want to
pull. For the rest of the branches, if you already have local commits,
`merge' is your only option. Once you send the local commits upstream,
you can pull again.

-- 
Óscar