Conflict while using "bzr pull"

[James Blackwell]

> I know one of the big complaints with "tla undo" is that it could easily
> get confused by duplicate ids, or all sorts of things. So that when
> things broke, you lost the tool to get you back to sanity. I believe
> "bzr revert" is much harder to break, but there still are edge cases
> where it won't do what you need.

We managed to fix up undo pretty well in baz. We never managed to fix all
of the edge cases in redo. Though that doesn't sound important in a revert
conversation, it can become moreso if something like shelve became revert.
None of it was overly complicated, but problems crawled out of the
wormwork.


> To make it obviously dangerous, maybe have the command be "bzr nuke",
> which will delete the working tree for you, and pull out a new one. But
> nuke might be reserved for other commands. (destroy a revision, and try
> to destroy it in any mirrors that you know about).

I think this is one place where a tla long-opt would do well: 

bzr revert --wipe-local-changes


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20051213/e8e086ad/attachment.pgp