On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 7:56 PM, John Arbash Meinel <<a href="mailto:john@arbash-meinel.com">john@arbash-meinel.com</a>> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> <div class="Ih2E3d">Torsten Bronger wrote:<br></div>...<br><div class="Ih2E3d"> ><br> > By the way, the "revert" didn't leave any foo.bar.~123~ files in my<br> > directories.<br> <br> </div>That is because it was shown as a clean merge. (The files would be the<br> same if you did 'bzr revert; bzr merge -r revid:XXXX'.) So it looked the<br> same as if you had merged someone else's code (didn't change anything)<br> and then changed your mind and did 'bzr revert'.<br> </blockquote><div><br>this happened to me yesterday too :<br>I expected the bzr revert to create the foo.bar.~123~ files , and it didn't<br>(fortunately I have the habbit of backing up before doing a revert, as I've been bitten before)<br> <br>I think we should find a way to make this easier, maybe do one or more of the following:<br>1) have an option to revert to force it to make backup~1~ files when changing anything<br>2) merge something like the heads into the core<br> 3) dont just tell people to williy nilly upgrade i.e. give a better message like Torsten said: <br>    "You may wish to synchronize with the master branch with pull/push<br>      before committing any changes."<br><br></div></div>If we can agree on some plan of action, I can look into implementing it.<br> <br>regards<br>marius<br>