Re: log format for vc-bzr

[Óscar Fuentes]

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

>> From: Óscar_Fuentes <address@hidden>
>> Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2010 22:51:07 +0100
>> 
>> Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:
>> 
>> >> > That's your mistake, right there: this is user documentation, not
>> >> > documentation of bzr internals.
>> >> 
>> >> Merge point is not about internal details. It is a fundamental concept
>> >> which the user is required to know if he pretends to make an effective
>> >> use of the DVCS.
>> >
>> > If it's such an important fundamental point, then why it is not
>> > mentioned even once in the docs?  At least I couldn't find it.
>> 
>> IMHO, Bazaar docs are way too simplistic when explaining DVCS core
>> concepts, if they explain them at all.
>
> I wasn't looking for explanation of core dVCS concepts.

Sorry, I thought that you asked why the bzr docs do not explain what a
merge point is.

> I was looking for the explanation of what "revert --forget-merges"
> does.  It could have been explained without introducing the "merge
> point" concept.

I don't think so.

> But even if we accept that "merge points" must be understood for the
> explanation of --forget-merges, the manual still shouldn't have used
> "pending merges".  If a tool has a "merge" command, then a "merge" is
> what that command does.  So talking about "pending merges" after a
> merge was already done is simply bad didactically.  And the "merges"
> part in --forget-merges is likewise a bad idea.  --forget-merge-points
> might be a better one, because everyone will understand that a "merge
> point" is not the same as "merge".

A "merge" is the abbreviated term for "merge point". It is a merge of
two branches.

At the time you use --forget-merges the merge point still doesn't
exist. It is created by the commit. So the hypothetical name for the
option would be more like

--commit-the-source-changes-but-do-not-create-a-merge-point

-- 
Óscar