[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Can anyone correct the Bazaar reference "revno:111954.1.97"?

From: Joshua Judson Rosen
Subject: Re: Can anyone correct the Bazaar reference "revno:111954.1.97"?
Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2014 22:47:52 -0500
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux)

"Eric S. Raymond" <address@hidden> writes:
> Oh, crap.  Now I'm confused about what to replace that revno with.  The
> alternatives are:
> 111964.1.6    2013-03-15T16:03:address@hidden
> 112051        2013-03-15T16:06:address@hidden

Eeek--sorry, I really meant that more as an FYI for anyone who was
already confused. "Don't Panic".

> It's only a difference in timestamp.  Do they have the same content?
> If not, serious can of worms.  If so, the qustion of which timestamp
> to consider authoritative becomes more philosophical.

It does look like the merge (112051) is indeed `just a merge'.

Actually going through and comparing the diffs ("bzr diff -c 112051"
vs. "bzr diff -c 11964.1.6"), the diffs off the two revisions are
identical except for slight differences in context, and that's explained
by the fact that 112051 looks like this:

    $ bzr log --line -r 112051 -n0
    112051: K. Handa 2013-03-16 [merge] Optimize ASCII file reading...
      111964.1.7: K. Handa 2013-03-16 [merge] merge trunk
      111964.1.6: K. Handa 2013-03-16 Optimize ASCII file reading...
      111964.1.5: K. Handa 2013-03-11 [merge] merge trunk

i.e.: the only thing that's at all different between the two
_changes_ is a slight difference in context, due to their different
positions in the DAG. Had the "Optimize ASCII file reading..."
change happened _after_ the second "merge trunk" (11964.1.7)
instead of before it, then I do think even the diff contexts
would be the same (the revision that 11964.1.7 was merging into
Handa's "work" branch was trunk 12050).

"'tis an ill wind that blows no minds."

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]