[Bug 87548] Re: bzr add and revert on symlink deletes symlink

[Martin Pool]

On 7/14/07, Kent Gibson <warthog618 at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm still interested in the explanation for the inconsistent behaviour
> of bzr revert.
>
> I'm also inclined to think the appropriate command to undo an
> accidental add should be revert. To use other examples, if I
> accidentally remove a file then revert is used to put it back. If I
> move a file accidentally, then revert will move it back. That makes
> revert feel like an undo command, and, be it by accident or design,
> that is a feature I like.  I don't like having to think which commands
> revert does work for and which commands require a different undo
> command.

revert means 'put this back like it was in the previous revision'.
These files were not in the previous revision, so to make them like
that again we delete them.  Similarly if you move and also edit a
file, then revert will both undo the edits and move it back.