monotone - Bugs: bug #29835, 'update -b' fails where 'update -r...
You are not allowed to post comments on this tracker with your current authentication level.
bug #29835: 'update -b' fails where 'update -r h:b' succeeds
Submitter: | Stephen Leake <stephen_leake> | ||
Submitted: | Sun 09 May 2010 10:55:20 AM UTC | ||
Category: | None | Severity: | 3 - Normal |
Item Group: | None | Status: | None |
Privacy: | Public | Assigned to: | None |
Open/Closed: | Open | ||
mtn version --full: |
|
Tue 22 Jun 2010 02:23:33 PM UTC, comment #3: |
Thomas Keller <tommyd> |
Wed 12 May 2010 06:44:28 AM UTC, comment #2: (slept with that problem and ... )
|
Zbigniew Zagórski <zzagorski> |
Tue 11 May 2010 11:18:37 PM UTC, comment #1: Here is proposal, how fixed behaviour could like:
|
Zbigniew Zagórski <zzagorski> |
Sun 09 May 2010 10:55:20 AM UTC, original submission:
Stephe Leake@sabul$ mtn heads
|
Stephen Leake <stephen_leake> |
Depends on the following items: None found
Items that depend on this one: None found
There are 0 votes so far. Votes easily highlight which items people would like to see resolved in priority, independently of the priority of the item set by tracker managers.
Follows 1 latest change.
Date | Changed by | Updated Field | Previous Value | => | Replaced by |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2010-05-11 | zzagorski | Attached File | - | Added bugfix_29835.patch, #20511 |
Powered by Savane 3.13-f8d8.
Corresponding source code
There is a third mode:
3. with branch and revision: updates to the specified revision if one of its branch certs matches the given branch name (note also #29843), otherwise aborts
I agree that the behaviour of -b branch vs -r h:branch is somewhat odd, and especially at the beginning I found that somewhat confusing as well. But if we make --branch foo mean h:foo, we're effectively overloading the meaning of this option in other places and this could create a bigger mess IMHO.
I'd go one step back and would ask if we really need the ability of switching the workspace revision only with a branch argument... is that actually used by anybody? I certainly always trigger -rh: and only give it another -b option if the target revision's branch doesn't match my current branch and contains ambigious branch certs...