[BUG] when doing a bzr pull with conflicts

[James Blackwell]

On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 02:39:10PM -0700, Rob Browning wrote:
> Robert Collins <robertc at robertcollins.net> writes:
> 
> > That said, when you have divergent branches, you probably want to be
> > doing a 'merge' rather than a 'pull'. Pull is equivalent to CVS
> > update or SVN update, which only makes sense when you are still on
> > the same branch - i.e. you have not committed, which creates a
> > unique branch.
> 
> If I understood you correctly, then it seems like this might confuse
> some cvs and svn users since in cvs/svn, update actually does do
> something like a merge with the "current branch", and you would
> normally run update whether you've committed or not.

I talked with Abentley about this awhile ago. My personal opinion is that
users want "Get missing code from there and put it here" and that the tool
can tell whether it should be doing a merge or a pull, that there should
just be one command.

> By the way, what happens if merge isn't given a BRANCH argument?  The
> "bzr help merge" that I have here doesn't appear to say explicitly,
> but if it defaults to the branch of the most recent merge or pull,
> then to a cvs/svn user, a bzr merge might seem more like a cvs/svn
> update than a bzr pull would.

This would be a great place to try out hacking bazaar-NG. :)

-- 
 James Blackwell      |   Try out the blog planet for revision control
 Tell someone a joke! |   at http://planet.revisioncontrol.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------
GnuPG (ID 06357400) AAE4 8C76 58DA 5902 761D  247A 8A55 DA73 0635 7400