Re: Confusing "bzr log" as result of merges

[Sven Joachim]

On 2011-05-21 11:30 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

>> From: Sven Joachim <address@hidden>
>> Cc: address@hidden,  address@hidden
>> Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 11:27:17 +0200
>> 
>> >> The downside of that is that bzr then does not track what revisions have
>> >> already been merged.
>> >
>> > And that is downside because...?
>> 
>> Because humans have to do the tracking then, without any help from the
>> VCS.
>
> This revision was already on the trunk, so its other instance doesn't
> need to be tracked.

The VCS has to track them if you want to do proper merges (as opposed to
cherry-picks aka merging only certain revisions).  That it presents
spurious logs for files that were not changed by the merge is a problem
specific to bzr, as Andreas had pointed out.

Cheers,
       Sven