From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,a326ac15995ef20e
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: "Ludovic Brenta" <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: ANNOUNCE: Debian build scripts on a public Monotone server
Date: 6 Oct 2006 01:24:34 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <1160123074.798618.79370@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
References: <871wpzd7js.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
   <1159259938.13504.19.camel@localhost>
   <1159263129.848672.286190@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>
   <1159267398.13504.35.camel@localhost>
   <1159433540.824912.193400@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
   <sa4irj7w91x.fsf@margay.local>
   <1159574582.667087.127500@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
   <87r6xtmvc8.fsf@willow.rfc1149.net>
   <1159994544.336977.122140@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
   <sa4lknu2csj.fsf@margay.local>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 212.190.145.10
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1160123080 17950 127.0.0.1 (6 Oct 2006 08:24:40
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 08:24:40 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <sa4lknu2csj.fsf@margay.local>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; fr;
 rv:1.8.0.7) Gecko/20060909 Firefox/1.5.0.7,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
X-HTTP-Via: 1.1 SEVPXS01
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=212.190.145.10;
   posting-account=ZjNXewwAAADyBPkwI57_UcX8yKfXWOss
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:6889
Date: 2006-10-06T01:24:34-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Brian May wrote:
> My (test) usage of merge so far as resulted in the result being
> automatically committed. Is the above usage different?
>
> Which brings me to a dislike of monotone, so often I see changelog messages like:
>
> merge of '646c7d2cca0e8dd0e97e0d8f3cc73e5a3d39ab8d'
>      and '87c207f4bee6cecb68e9bcc9c65c37a93c99934c'

You can avoid these messages with "mtn log --no-merges".

> Unfortunately, this doesn't tell me anything.

True. I also would prefer --no-merges to be the default. I think you
can make it so in your ~/.monotone/monotonerc, but I haven't looked
into it yet.

> A manual description would be better, for example:
>
> Merge in bug fix for XYZ into main tree.

For non-trivial merges where you resolve conflicts in a creative way,
this may indeed be nice to have. Maybe "merge_into_dir" or
"explicit_merge" already allow you to add your own comments?

But in the case of trivial, automated merges, such functionality would
in fact be harmful. For one thing, a trivial merge guarantees that you
have all the changes from both parents and nothing else; so a custom
comment would not say anything useful. OTOH, it would alter the SHA1 of
the resulting revision and make it impossible for other people to
obtain the exact same revision ID (which is precisely the SHA1) if
they, too, merge automatically.

> I believe the parents are already mentioned in the revision anyway.

Yes.

-- 
Ludovic Brenta.