[rfc] 'bzr missing' for checkout could use master branch for comparing histories

[Aaron Bentley]

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

Martin Pool wrote:
> I find I almost always want to just know about the revisions on one
> side (either --mine or --theirs).  The current default of showing both
> makes it just hard to read the output.  

That's my experience, too.

>  --verbose, -v 	    show which files will be changed
>  --list, -l         show a list of revisions to be applied
>  --dry-run, -n      just show what would be done

Interesting.  I think that might work.

> One risk with this is that people may omit '-n' and update when they
> don't want to.  I think it's a tolerable risk, and no unrecoverable data
> is lost.

Not true.  Update will perform a tree merge of the upstream revision and
the local, uncommitted changes, and this merge can't easily be undone.

I suppose one option would be to take it in the opposite direction, and
create a 'preview' command, with subcommands for merge, update, etc.

e.g. bzr preview merge * ~= bzr merge --dry-run *

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

iD8DBQFEz1tV0F+nu1YWqI0RAnYjAJ9+uLifLq+hERnl6Eit63UKcj0E4wCdGcRJ
6fpkVtutBDf2rRWMRGlNDAI=
=kfQw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----