Rewriting Ubuntu branches

[Martin Pool]

2009/12/15 James Westby <jw+debian at jameswestby.net>:
> On Mon Dec 14 01:55:06 +0000 2009 Martin Pool wrote:
>> In general whenever we're decorating commands we should ask whether
>> there is a more appropriate place to do the extension.  I think here
>> perhaps it would be better to add a hook called when an operation is
>> going to fail due to divergence, giving it the chance to clean it up.
>> That could be useful to other people.
>
> That sounds like a good idea to me.

<https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/bzr/+bug/496764> currently Medium,
but can go up or down.

>> It sounds like this is going towards a more general 'replaces'
>> relationship between revisions, which ought to be treated as part of
>> the merge graph but generally not shown in logs etc?
>
> I think that's one way of looking at it. Are you proposing that we
> implement such a thing?

It's been discussed before.  I think we could implement it.  I think
we could implement it, again perhaps by adding extension points so we
don't need to make a heavy commitment to having it in the core format
until we have some experience with it.

Where do you think these two fit in priority relative to other udd things?
-- 
Martin <http://launchpad.net/~mbp/>