bzr switch should have a -r option

I think of that more as "bzr update should have a -r option".

Am Mittwoch, den 16.01.2008, 21:04 +0000 schrieb fullermd:
> I think of that more as "bzr update should have a -r option".
It may involve switching to a completely different branch, in which
 case I think the name "update" is confusing.
--
Jelmer Vernooij <email address hidden> - http://samba.org/~jelmer/
Jabber: <email address hidden>

> It may involve switching to a completely different branch, in which
> case I think the name "update" is confusing.

Oh, I see. Carry on.

--
Matthew Fuller (MF4839) | <email address hidden>
Systems/Network Administrator | http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/
           On the Internet, nobody can hear you scream.

I have seen discussions about this functionality being achievable by a combination of "merge" and "revert", but I think these discussions miss the point: the point of having "switch -r" is to be able to safely make experiments with time travel and parallel universes to see the effect of current changes or the point at which something breaks, then come back safely to the present current state.

I have only used CVS before, and I really miss this feature when investigating bugs; it makes it almost monkey-trivial to narrow new bugs to a single revision; and if revisions are sufficiently atomic, bugs become obvious.

Or I may be missing some point myself...

@Daniel, did you submit this patch ?

It has just occurred to me that for the case of an unbound branch, "bzr pull --overwrite -r X" approximates quite closely to the desired outcome.

@Max Bowsher, Re: "bzr pull --overwrite -r X"

... but then you would sacrifice your non-committed changes.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Miguel González Cuadrado wrote:
> @Max Bowsher, Re: "bzr pull --overwrite -r X"
>
> ... but then you would sacrifice your non-committed changes.
>

Actually you don't. "pull --overwrite" merges the changes for the
committed revisions, and brings across the uncommitted stuff.

John
=:->

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkrzt6cACgkQJdeBCYSNAAPmeACdHqJm25psp2+OYVuaxD4htmx3
dosAmQFj4apnx8ftGw2OmMXx33adYlKk
=2Ezc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

John A Meinel wrote:
> Miguel González Cuadrado wrote:
>> @Max Bowsher, Re: "bzr pull --overwrite -r X"
>
>> ... but then you would sacrifice your non-committed changes.
>
>
> Actually you don't. "pull --overwrite" merges the changes for the
> committed revisions, and brings across the uncommitted stuff.

Really?

Ian C.

"update -r" should change working tree. Branch is intact.
How about "switch -r"? It should update branch & working tree?!

@Max Bowsher, Re: "bzr pull --overwrite -r X"

I searched for "update -r" or "git dissect" analogs and found yours "bzr pull --overwrite -r X".

Sad, sad day for me... Very sad...
It destroyed my last changes.

I "bzr pull --overwrite -r X" to update just working tree 10 revisions back. And know I cannot get them back!

I suspect they are completely destroed, is it correct?! I have only one local branch for my (freelance) project.
Please tell me, it my project can be recovered?!

2009/11/17 Nishi <email address hidden>:
> @Max Bowsher, Re: "bzr pull --overwrite -r X"
>
> I searched for "update -r" or "git dissect" analogs and found yours "bzr
> pull --overwrite -r X".
>
> Sad, sad day for me... Very sad...
> It destroyed my last changes.
>
> I "bzr pull --overwrite -r X" to update just working tree 10 revisions
> back. And know I cannot get them back!
>
> I suspect they are completely destroed, is it correct?! I have only one local branch for my (freelance) project.
> Please tell me, it my project can be recovered?!

Running 'bzr heads' (from the bzrtools plugin) will tell you about
unrerefenced revisions; you can then revert to one of them using "bzr
pull -r revid:...." from that list.

Sorry for the trouble.

--
Martin <http://launchpad.net/~mbp/>

'bzr heads' shows nothing, i tried it already.

Nishi wrote:
> I suspect they are completely destroed, is it correct?!
> Please tell me, it my project can be recovered?!

The information should still be present in the repository. In a simple
test setup, I could recover such information in the following way:

$ bzr heads --dead-only
$ bzr pull --overwrite -r revid:<revid-of-dead-head> .

As you have noticed, this pull will change the branch as well as the
working copy. One more reason I want a tool working on the working tree
only, leaving the branch alone.

2009/11/17 Nishi <email address hidden>:
> 'bzr heads' shows nothing, i tried it already.

heads --all?

--
Martin <http://launchpad.net/~mbp/>

Thank you for your help! I got 10 tips for each commit missing and also a tip for each uncommit, total ~20 tips. I just searched for the latest and restored it with 'bzr pull --overwrite -r revid:<revid-of-dead-head>'

Can this fix be merged to 2.1?

I believe the status for this bug is wrong? "Fix commited" to me says it's on the project main trunk, which is not true in this case, as far as I'm aware.

The status is correct.

We use "Fix Committed" to mean "A fix for this bug exists in a branch somewhere": <http://doc.bazaar.canonical.com/developers/bug-handling.html#bug-status>.

@Nishi, this can be in 2.1 if someone finishes and reviews the branch in the next few weeks.

Daniel has not been around much for a while so I'm going to unassign it from him and put the branch up for review.

mp is here https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~daniel-thewatkins/bzr/183559-switch-r/+merge/16827

I'm the patch pilot this week, and John's pointed out that there's a half-finished patch here, so assigning this to me.

Fixed in lp;bzr r4964