Fix a botched log-message

[Martin Pool]

On undefined, Stefan Monnier <monnier at iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
> > There are some complications that I'm aware of.
>
>  > 1) Do you version this new information or not?
>
>  I'd expect we would want to version it.
>
>
>  >    b) If you do version, then you still have a potential for conflicts
>  >    on a location that doesn't have a direct filesystem representation.
>
>  Why not give it a file name.
>  After all, we do it for .bzrignore.  We could do the same for tags, BTW.
>  That would mean we can't change that info on a tree-less branch, but
>  it doesn't sound like a serious restriction.

Stefan's answers are what I had in mind.

This is obviously not suitable for the nuclear scenario, but it is a
much smaller and more appropriate hammer when you just discover a
typo.  If you really need to destroy the data creating new revisions
is better.

I just thought of something else interesting: if we implement the
feature discussed in London of doing partial checkouts by masking some
files in or out of the working directory, then control files like
.bzrignore or the hypothetical .bzrloginfo can be fairly easily
excluded when they're not relevant...

-- 
Martin <http://launchpad.net/~mbp/>