ERROR: These branches have diverged.

Sam Steingold sds at
Mon Mar 26 17:07:52 BST 2007

Aaron Bentley wrote:
> Sam Steingold wrote:
>> I am stuck again.
>> what I want is a cvs-like approach: I want to have the most recent
>> version of the source tree, occasionally submitting a patch. "cvs up"
>> will mark the locally patched files with "M" until my patch is committed
>> by a maintainer (after which "cvs up" becomes silent again).
>> what happened is that I submitted a patch and committed it locally (why
>> did I do it? dunno - maybe to quiet some other warning?) and now I don't
>> know what to do to get in sync with the master repository again.
> We support a CVS-like approach, but committing locally defeats an
> approach like that.
> If you want to take a CVS-like approach, then don't commit locally, and
> pull will work just fine.
> Or to be even closer to CVS, do
> $ bzr checkout
> # hack hack
> $ bzr status
>  M  foo
> $ bzr update
> $ bzr status
>  M foo
> By committing your local changes, you're creating a new line of
> development.  When you have your own line of development, you must to
> "bzr merge" to apply changes from, and "bzr
> commit" after you have reviewed/tested the changes.

1. if I have local uncommitted changes, I think pull (or something 
else?) will fail.

2. ok, now that I screwed up things by local commits, how do I recover? 
is there a better way that "rm -rf; bzr checkout"?

Thanks for your kind help. Also, thanks to Nicholas and those who 
answered my previous questions as well as those in the "Understanding 
pull" thread.

More information about the bazaar mailing list