Comment 2 for bug 842695

Revision history for this message
Jelmer Vernooij (jelmer) wrote : Re: [Bug 842695] [NEW] log --include-merges apparently prints unrelated commits

On 09/06/2011 03:44 PM, John A Meinel wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 09/06/2011 03:33 PM, Martin von Gagern wrote:
>> Public bug reported:
>>
>> Looking at the log for the bash_completion plugin in current bzr.dev, I get a strange result:
>> $ ./bzr log --log-format=line --include-merges bzrlib/plugins/bash_completion/
>> 5268.7.2: Jelmer Vernooij 2011-03-17 [merge] merge bzr.dev.
>> 5050.73.11: Vincent Ladeuil 2011-07-06 [merge] Merging in trunk
>> 5425.4.4: Martin Pool 2011-03-28 [merge] merge trunk
>> 5609.39.9: Vincent Ladeuil 2011-05-26 [merge] Retarget to trunk and merge ...
>> 5340.12.24: Martin 2011-05-18 [merge] Merge bzr.dev to renew work
>> 5074.5.3: INADA Naoki 2011-05-06 [merge] merge lp:bzr
>>
>> In particular I notice that the lines printed without the --include-merges are not included any more:
>> $ ./bzr log --log-format=line bzrlib/plugins/bash_completion/
>> 5638: Canonical.com Pat... 2011-01-28 [merge] (vila) Mark test failures on w...
>> 5277: Canonical.com Pat... 2010-06-02 [merge] (lifeless) Tab-complete tags w...
>> 5255: Canonical.com Pat... 2010-05-25 [merge] (lifeless) Generalise probing ...
>> 5251: Canonical.com Pat... 2010-05-24 [merge] (lifeless) Adjusted README.txt...
>> 5249: Canonical.com Pat... 2010-05-21 [merge] (lifeless) Fix deprecation war...
>> 5240: Canonical.com Pat... 2010-05-19 [merge] (lifeless) Replace the unmaint...
>>
>> Obviously there is somethig broken here in a way which the test suite
>> didn't catch. So I guess that before writing a fix, someone should
>> identify the cause of this and create a smaller test case.
>>
>> ** Affects: bzr
>> Importance: Undecided
>> Status: New
>>
> I would guess this is intentional, but I'd like to find out more what
> you expect.
>
> namely, "--include-merges" is telling you the revision that was the
> original change, while '--no-include-merges' (default) is telling you
> what mainline revision merged a change.
>
It's a bit odd that "--include-merges" doesn't just include the mergeD
commits but also no longer lists the merge commits.

Cheers,

Jelmer