missing data...

[Maritza Mendez]

I realize the idea of misplacing (or losing) work makes all of us
nervous.  And I'm glad you found yours.  But I am even more interested
in why bzr thought the parent branch had diverged from the common
ancestor (as shown by the need to update).
Is this a known aspect of commit --local ?
I admit I've never used local commits but I'd like to know what to expect.

-M


On 6/12/09, Olivier <o.r-d at laposte.net> wrote:
>
>
>>> Didn't you see the last line saying:
>>>
>>> Use --include-merges or -n0 to see merged revisions.
>>>
> as I wrote in my last update, I have now solved the problem using bzr
> heads --dead-only so I cannot be 100% sure about what I saw in the log
> before solving the issue.
> But I am quite sure that I tried bzr log -n0 and that there was nothing
> at the end of "bzr log".
> I really need to take the time to understand the head concept ...... I
> someone can point me to a good doc on "heads" I'll be happy :-)
>
>
>

-- 
Sent from my mobile device