[PATCH] (reminder) Fixes for revno:N:path

[Aaron Bentley]

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

Matthieu Moy wrote:
> Aaron Bentley <aaron.bentley at utoronto.ca> writes:
> 
>> John Arbash Meinel wrote:
>>
>>> Can I get someone else to look at the patch? Aaron, Robert? (I know
>>> Martin is gone this week).
>> Many of the lines are too wide.
> 
> That's fixed.
> 
>> Specifying a branch can also specify a file to merge.  I doubt this is
>> the right thing to do.
> 
> True. Well, I already mentionned that I disliked this behavior. 

You're not alone there, although my beef is that you can only specify
one file this way.

> You
> have no way to say file foo/bar in branch path/to/branch if
> path/to/branch/foo is itself a branch. 

Oh, this is because branches aren't trees, right?  So you can stick one
branch inside another in ways that wouldn't make sense for a tree.  I
can see your point.

> I'm affraid this will not be an
> unusual behavior especially when nested trees will get in. In our
> case, this is undocumented behavior, so I suspect no one except bzr's
> developers have ever used it.

Dunno.  It is consistent with our other commands, so some others may
have found it.

> And indeed, if what you mean is that I can
> 
> $ bzr merge -r revno:42:/branch/path/to/file
> 
> It indeed does the right thing (IMHO):
> 
> $ bzr merge -r revno:1:/tmp/bar/foo           
> bzr: ERROR: Not a branch: /tmp/bar/foo/

That was what I meant.  Thanks.

>> I would like a clearer explanation of why merge can't accept two
>> branches, also.
> 
> It just didn't work out of the box (the wrong branch was used to fetch
> the revision from). But I've fixed that also, so the corresponding
> testcase is now uncommented.

Great, +1.

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

iD8DBQFFBV0E0F+nu1YWqI0RAkwLAJ4/ZkENHP8K0+SS9/zqJuHcfzmnNACeIUDQ
wtgdyyzadWJg0VRizFXgHrs=
=WM73
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----