bzr pull, bzr merge could show the log entry for retrieved revisions

[Anand Kumria]

On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 09:16:53 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:

> On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 06:41, Matthieu Moy wrote:
>> I'd like to be able to do "missing" and "pull" or "merge" in a single
>> command.
>>
>> Something like
>>
>> $ bzr log -r -1..
>> revno: 1334
>> committer: mbp at sourcefrog.net
>> timestamp: Mon 2005-10-24 18:37:38 +1000
>> message:
>>   More merge/fetch tests
>> $ bzr pull --verbose
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> revno: 1335
>> committer: mbp at sourcefrog.net
>> timestamp: Mon 2005-10-24 19:15:57 +1000
>> message:
>>   Unconditionally fetch all new history during merge
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> revno: 1336
>> committer: mbp at sourcefrog.net
>> timestamp: Mon 2005-10-24 20:05:58 +1000
>> message:
>>   Doc
> 
> I think that could be nice.
> 
> Slightly OT:
> 
> I was actually thinking yesterday about "pull" and "merge". Some people seem 
> to think pull should _just_ pull, and if it can't it should exit. Others 
> think pull should fall back to a merge.
> 
> It turns out in git, I found out the hard way, that pull means pull + merge. 
> Personally that bugs me, because it means you can inadvertantly diverge your 
> tree.
> 
> Perhaps we need a "mirror" command which is explicitly used for mirroring 
> someone else's tree. It could be smart too, eg:

>From what I understand, the usage model is that you might have a seperate
directory for 'upstream with no changes' another for 'feed to upstream'
and various others with your changes in them.

This is what I've been doing with bzr as well, and it seems to almost what
I think I want it to.

Cheers,
Anand