On Tue, 2010-12-21 at 13:15 +0000, Florian Rathgeber wrote:
> To my understanding join --reference doesn't do anything useful in a 2a
> format tree anyway. It works, but all files in the joined subtree are
> reported as unknown, including its .bzr directory. That's certainly not
> the intended behavior, is it?
>
> What is the current state of join --reference? Is it supposed to work at
> all? And if so, what tree format is required?
No, join by reference doesn't work properly yet. The development-subtree
format does support nested trees but it only allows you to record them.
by-reference nested trees are not supported yet, which is also why "bzr
join --reference" is not shown by e.g. "bzr help join".
On Tue, 2010-12-21 at 13:15 +0000, Florian Rathgeber wrote:
> To my understanding join --reference doesn't do anything useful in a 2a
> format tree anyway. It works, but all files in the joined subtree are
> reported as unknown, including its .bzr directory. That's certainly not
> the intended behavior, is it?
>
> What is the current state of join --reference? Is it supposed to work at
> all? And if so, what tree format is required?
No, join by reference doesn't work properly yet. The development-subtree
format does support nested trees but it only allows you to record them.
by-reference nested trees are not supported yet, which is also why "bzr
join --reference" is not shown by e.g. "bzr help join".
Cheers,
Jelmer