Martin (<email address hidden>) raised this in the mailing list. He's on vacation, and this bug (if true) is too important to delay.
I have tried to provide discriminating examples based on his original remarks. See the thread entitled "Strange failure with mv and commit" for historical reference.
One begins to wonder if the collation order of the names matters. As crazy as this sounds, let us do an experiment. We will create a file named '2' and we will either demote it (to '1') or promote it (to '3') and then return to '2'.
First, we do the promotion case. This works:
bzr init t1
cd t1
touch 2
bzr add 2
bzr mv 2 3
bzr commit -m "call it 3"
bzr mv 3 2
bzr commit -m "call it 2"
And this fails:
bzr init t1
cd t1
touch 2
bzr add 2
bzr mv 2 1
bzr commit -m "call it 1"
bzr mv 1 2
bzr commit -m "call it 2"
Martin (<email address hidden>) raised this in the mailing list. He's on vacation, and this bug (if true) is too important to delay.
I have tried to provide discriminating examples based on his original remarks. See the thread entitled "Strange failure with mv and commit" for historical reference.
One begins to wonder if the collation order of the names matters. As crazy as this sounds, let us do an experiment. We will create a file named '2' and we will either demote it (to '1') or promote it (to '3') and then return to '2'.
First, we do the promotion case. This works:
bzr init t1
cd t1
touch 2
bzr add 2
bzr mv 2 3
bzr commit -m "call it 3"
bzr mv 3 2
bzr commit -m "call it 2"
And this fails:
bzr init t1
cd t1
touch 2
bzr add 2
bzr mv 2 1
bzr commit -m "call it 1"
bzr mv 1 2
bzr commit -m "call it 2"