Excerpts from Brian Aker's message of Tue Mar 13 20:48:33 -0700 2012: > Hi, > > On Mar 11, 2012, at 4:18 AM, Henrik Ingo wrote: > > > You should instead do: > > > > cd staging > > bzr merge ../trunk > > bzr commit > > bzr push ../trunk > > That would reverse trunk and cause merge issues. >
How so? You would have the same graph in the end, whether you have a commit saying "merging from staging" or "merging from trunk", they're both effectively the same graph. I think it would be equally confusing, but the merges should not be a problem. Perhaps take a look at tarmac, which is used in the Launchpad project to run full CI tests and then land code in trunk. It pulls the commit message from the merge proposal descriptions if possible. https://launchpad.net/tarmac > How can we automate a useful message? > > bzr status --verbose > some_file > > That would give us the pending messages, which is useful, but we also get the > file changes at the top. > > Any ideas? > > Cheers, > -Brian _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
