ERROR: These branches have diverged.

[Sam Steingold]

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 http://bzr.xsteve.at/dvc/
> # 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 http://bzr.xsteve.at/dvc/, 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.