Re: merge conlict?

[Óscar Fuentes]

Andreas Schwab <address@hidden> writes:

>> For emacs purposes, you are interested on knowing *who* broke the build
>> and *when* he incorporated the faulty change into upstream's trunk.
>
> It seems pretty useless if cannot find out which revision of a big merge
> is to blame.

The idea is to be able to say "Joe's revision X broke the build" and
then is Joe's bussiness to determine which of the revisions he merged on
the revision X broke the build.

There is no concept of "big merge" on bzr. (nor on git, AFAIK) So either
you include the merged revisions and cope with unstable intermediate
points or you ignore them, locate the merge point where the problem was
introduced on mainline, and then proceed to bisect the branch that
originated that merge point.