[MERGE] Branch format 6

Erik Bågfors zindar at gmail.com
Mon Feb 12 10:58:05 GMT 2007

> > Strict history
> > ==============
> > When a branch has a strict history policy, you can only append to it;
> > you cannot change the previous history.  This keeps revnos stable and
> > maintains a consistent view of history.  Strict history can be enabled
> > by setting "strict_history=True" in .bzr/branch/branch.conf
> This is https://bugs.launchpad.net/bzr/+bug/73752 by the way, and
> deserves a mention in NEWS, including the command line necessary to
> create such a branch.  I'm happy to see it come in, I think it will be
> helpful in cases like that bug.
> I'm not sure 'strict history' really conveys the meaning of this though.
> In that bug john suggests 'preserve_mainline' -- how is that for you?
> Or maybe 'disallow_mainline_changes'.  I would like to convey the facts
> that

First of all, Yes, I love this feature.  However, reading the bug
doesn't make me 100% happy.  I think a command to "Merge this branch
into the other branch but do it locally" is needed. I talked about
"merge --reverse" before as an idea about this.

Basically, If I want to push to a branch that has this property, I have to run

bzr push --> Generates an error message telling me to bind
bzr bind
bzr update
bzr commit
bzr unbind

This is because I don't want to leave my branch bound.

With a merge --reverse thing (yes, the name can change :) ).
bzr push --> Generates an error message telling me to merge --reverse
bzr merge --reverse
bzr commit
bzr push

Ok, it's only one command less but for someone that doesn't work with
checkouts (bound branches), it makes more sense.


More information about the bazaar mailing list