Confused about stability of revno's

[Stefan Haller]

Nicholas Allen <nick.allen at onlinehome.de> wrote:

> Note that using a bound branch makes this more convenient (without you
> having to create your own local branch of master, merge your changes
> into it, and then push). From a user's point of view, it would work
> exactly the same way as it does in Subversion

Which kind of defeats the purpose; I don't *want* it to work like in
Subversion.  :-)

Seriously though, the workflow would be to use "bzr ci" if it lets you,
and "bzr ci --local" if it doesn't; then you would have to "bzr up" at
some point to merge your changes back (which somehow feels backwards,
but maybe I could get used to it).  You'd just have to be careful to
never do "bzr up" in a dirty working copy when there was a previous
--local commit, in which case all kind of confusion seems to happen.


-- 
Stefan Haller
Berlin, Germany
http://www.haller-berlin.de/