[PATCH][BUG] The 'bzr check' command doesn't check the merged revision

[Aaron Bentley]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
> On Thursday 08 September 2005 19:56, you (Aaron Bentley) wrote:
> 
>>Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
>>
>>>On Wednesday 07 September 2005 21:31, Aaron Bentley wrote:
>>
>>>>Checking them is fine, but merged revisions aren't guaranteed to be
>>>>present in storage, so you should not treat their absence as an error.
>>>
>>>
>>>How it is possible to merge some revisions without storing these into the repository ?
>>
>>When you merge a revision, you implicitly merge its parent revisions,
>>too.  So you don't need to have access to the parent revisions.
> 
> 
> I don't fully agree. I think that the user should decide what merge. Sometime is more 
> useful to merge only the full branch as unique revision, 

Yes, you can accomplish this by specifying a base.  But it's not the
default, and history-sensitive merging won't handle it.

> However should you clarify if now ( 0.7 ) bzr merge only the latest revision or the full
> history ? On the basis of my test it seems that every revision is merged.

It does a merge that encompasses all the changes in the branch by
default.  It will try to copy every revision mentioned in the ancestry,
but it may not succeed.

Aaron
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDIIU60F+nu1YWqI0RAq3TAJ0fRGYPfYzMQwulCJ4+G5w137chrgCfaDQA
PFlBYwnWHTplBhryTP/gC/Q=
=CrXW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----