[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: merge conlict?
From: |
Andreas Schwab |
Subject: |
Re: merge conlict? |
Date: |
Mon, 25 Jan 2010 16:47:46 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.91 (gnu/linux) |
Óscar Fuentes <address@hidden> writes:
> There is no concept of "big merge" on bzr. (nor on git, AFAIK)
If you merge a long development branch, then that's a big merge.
> So either you include the merged revisions and cope with unstable
> intermediate points or you ignore them, locate the merge point where
> the problem was introduced on mainline, and then proceed to bisect the
> branch that originated that merge point.
That's exactly what bisect does, automagically. If you are careful with
your history, then this just works.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, address@hidden
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."
- Re: merge conlict?, (continued)
- Re: merge conlict?, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/01/25
- Re: merge conlict?, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/01/25
- Re: merge conlict?, Teemu Likonen, 2010/01/25
- Re: merge conlict?, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/01/25
- Re: merge conlict?, Andreas Schwab, 2010/01/25
- Re: merge conlict?, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/01/25
- Re: merge conlict?, Andreas Schwab, 2010/01/25
- Re: merge conlict?, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/01/25
- Re: merge conlict?, Andreas Schwab, 2010/01/25
- Re: merge conlict?, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/01/25
- Re: merge conlict?,
Andreas Schwab <=
- Re: merge conlict?, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/01/25
- Re: merge conlict?, Andreas Schwab, 2010/01/25
- Re: merge conlict?, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/01/25
- Re: merge conlict?, Andreas Schwab, 2010/01/25
- Re: merge conlict?, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/01/25
- Re: merge conlict?, Andreas Schwab, 2010/01/25
- Re: merge conlict?, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/01/25
- Re: merge conlict?, Andreas Schwab, 2010/01/25
- Re: merge conlict?, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/01/25
- Re: merge conlict?, Andreas Schwab, 2010/01/25