Merge lp://staging/~jameinel/bzr/preview-pull-760152 into lp://staging/bzr/2.3
Proposed by
John A Meinel
| Status: | Merged |
|---|---|
| Approved by: | John A Meinel |
| Approved revision: | no longer in the source branch. |
| Merged at revision: | 5641 |
| Proposed branch: | lp://staging/~jameinel/bzr/preview-pull-760152 |
| Merge into: | lp://staging/bzr/2.3 |
| Diff against target: |
81 lines (+25/-3) 3 files modified
bzrlib/builtins.py (+1/-1) bzrlib/tests/blackbox/test_merge.py (+20/-2) doc/en/release-notes/bzr-2.3.txt (+4/-0) |
| To merge this branch: | bzr merge lp://staging/~jameinel/bzr/preview-pull-760152 |
| Related bugs: |
| Reviewer | Review Type | Date Requested | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jelmer Vernooij (community) | Approve | ||
|
Review via email:
|
|||
Commit message
Bug #760152, 'bzr merge --preview --pull' should not change the last-revision (be equivalent to "bzr merge --preview")
Description of the change
This is a small tweak to the merge code.
Basically, if you use "bzr merge --preview" it shows you the diff, without changing the WorkingTree. It turns out that "bzr merge --pull --preview" would apply "--pull" and change the branch's last-revision even though it really should just "--preview"
I'm targeting 2.3, though we could easily backport this as far back as we want. (The initial change is on the 2.1 branch, but the NEWS update is obviously on 2.3)
To post a comment you must log in.
Revision history for this message
| John A Meinel (jameinel) wrote | # |
Preview Diff
[H/L] Next/Prev Comment, [J/K] Next/Prev File, [N/P] Next/Prev Hunk
On Wed, 2011-04-20 at 09:54 +0000, John A Meinel wrote:
> John A Meinel has proposed merging lp:~jameinel/bzr/preview-pull-760152 into lp:bzr/2.3.
>
> Requested reviews:
> bzr-core (bzr-core)
> Related bugs:
> Bug #760152 in Bazaar: "bzr merge --pull --preview BRANCH does not always honor the --preview option"
> https:/
>
> For more details, see:
> https:/
>
> This is a small tweak to the merge code.
review approve
> I'm targeting 2.3, though we could easily backport this as far back as we want. (The initial change is on the 2.1 branch, but the NEWS update is obviously on 2.3)
Since this was only reported recently I wonder many people will actually
be affected by this and so how useful it would be to backport further
than 2.3. On the other hand, it also doesn't look like a very risky
change.
Cheers,
Jelmer