[00:00] <hendrixski> beuno, I've been trying the send command, and I get "nothing to do"
[00:00] <hendrixski> even though there are changes :-/
[00:01]  * hendrixski reads man bzr and finds "push"
[00:01] <beuno> hendrixski, exactly
[00:01] <beuno> it's push not send
[00:01] <beuno> send is for sending bundles (patches)
[00:02] <hendrixski> beuno, the manual didn't do a good job of explaining that
[00:02] <hendrixski> from looking at it I thought that push was just for creating... not for updating
[00:03]  * beuno goes look at the manual
[00:04] <beuno> hendrixski, you are right
[00:04] <beuno> I'll send an email to the list and see if we can clear that up a bit, thanks
[00:04] <hendrixski> :-)
[00:04] <hendrixski> Thanks for looking into it and following up
[00:05] <beuno> hendrixski, :D
[00:06]  * hendrixski continues to explore the awesome world of bzr
[00:06]  * hendrixski while throwing candy at little kids who show up at his door
[00:10] <beuno> hendrixski, you can follow up on the issue in the following thread: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/2007q4/033441.html
[00:10] <hendrixski> cool
[00:10] <beuno> (and add any input that might help)
[00:12] <beuno> time to head home
[00:12] <beuno> have fun learning the ropes hendrixski, and welcome!
[00:13] <hendrixski> :-) It feels like a very worthwhile project... I tried it out with a friend a few days ago but I had .15 he had .91... so things didn't work... we're gonna try it again with the centralized model in a few days
[02:46] <beuno> Verterok!
[02:47] <Verterok> beuno: Hi
[02:47] <beuno> Verterok, all good?
[02:48] <Verterok> all good, you?
[02:49] <beuno> pretty good too, just started working on the html-thingie a few minutes ago
[02:49] <Verterok> nice! :D
[02:49] <beuno> and, I have a small glitch in the XML to look into, because today, one of the repos generated invalid HTML
[02:49] <beuno> er, XML
[02:49] <beuno> closed </log> twice
[02:49] <Verterok> ups
[02:50] <beuno> but I haven't looked into it deep enough to file a bug/patch it
[02:50] <beuno> oh, quick question, are you going to Lujan on saturday?
[02:51] <Verterok> well this is enough to make me review the tests
[02:52] <Verterok> if all go as planed, I'll
[02:52] <Verterok> do you?
[02:52] <beuno> Verterok, all I know up to know is that it generated from a asking for a single revision, not the whole log
[02:53] <beuno> Verterok, I'm still undecided if I'm going or not, haven't got enough reasons to go yet   :p    I was thinking I migh catch you there for some brainstorming/sprint, but thinking it through, I'm not sure if those events are the best moment for such things
[02:57] <Verterok> beuno: If I go, is mainly  to participate as a member of PyAr, but not sure if I'll go to the ¿presentations? (I don't known how to translate "charlas" :P)
[02:59] <beuno> Verterok, right, I don't usually go either. I'll keep thinking about it
[02:59] <beuno> looking into the bug now
[03:00] <Verterok> me too
[04:12] <Peaker> Hey i created a repo with a default of no working trees but if I "bzr branch" in there it does create a working tree, can I avoid that?
[09:30] <ignas> hi
[10:42] <ree> hi all! Are there any usage examples for nested tree support (join and split) ?
[10:46] <fullermd> I don't think there are...
[10:47] <ree> fullermd, does it work actually on a usable level? or yet risky?
[10:48]  * ree cannot figure out how to use it
[10:48] <fullermd> Well, it's not really intended to be used   :)
[10:48] <ree> haha
[10:48] <fullermd> The backend pieces of it are pretty much in place, but most of the frontend doesn't exist.
[10:49] <ree> I would like to include a separate branch as a subdir of another branch.
[10:50] <ree> I cannot make any sensible use of join / split, don't understand what's going on.
[12:37] <mathrick> jelmer: any luck with my bugs?
[12:40] <jelmer> mathrick: not yet, sorry
[12:40] <mathrick> ok
[12:40] <mathrick> just checking
[12:59] <lifeless> moin
[13:00] <fullermd> It's downright disturbing hearing you say that when my clock says A.M.
[14:14] <corporate_cookie> is there a way to edit commit messages, after committing ?
[14:15] <james_w> corporate_cookie: no, you have to uncommit and then commit again.
[14:15] <corporate_cookie> thanks james_w
[14:15] <corporate_cookie> alas : )
[17:26] <lifeless> hi
[17:36] <corporate_cookie> lifeless: hello : )
[17:46] <lifeless> hi corporate_cookie ; I have to go sorry
[17:47] <corporate_cookie> its cool : ) i was just being friendly
[20:04] <fullermd> Is it a coincidence that check shows me a number of "inconsistent parents" and "file versions not referenced by their inventory" that are exactly the same?
[20:21] <ubotu> New bug: #159351 in bzr "reconcile's progress bar is broken" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/159351
[21:25] <ubotu> New bug: #159370 in bzr-eclipse "xml-output not detected" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/159370
[21:34] <Peaker> Say, is there any way to get a nice GUI for branch management (create a branch, remove a branch, etc) on some standardized branch URL scheme?
[21:35] <Peaker> some folks really want a GUI to do everything
[21:45] <ubotu> New bug: #159377 in bzr "commit-builder-based InterRepository implementation" [Wishlist,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/159377
[22:57] <Peaker> can I set the parent of a branch?
[22:59] <jam-laptop> Peaker: "bzr pull --remember", "bzr merge --remember", etc
[22:59] <Peaker> jam-laptop: that sets pull branch, not parent, doesn't it?
[22:59] <jam-laptop> there is only 1 other branch
[22:59] <jam-laptop> called 'parent'
[23:00] <jam-laptop> well, there is a 'push' branch
[23:00] <Peaker> what does the "submit:" revisionspec look for?
[23:01] <Peaker> If I am going to merge into a branch, I want to review what the merge is gonna do
[23:01] <Peaker> Is it best to just start the merge and review a diff, or to diff against ancestor:other_branch or submit: ?  I asked about parent because I thought it affected submit:
[23:03] <jam-laptop> bzr diff -rancestor:other/branch is usually agood approximation
[23:03] <jam-laptop> but it won't tell you about conflicts
[23:05] <jam-laptop> many people feel like 'bzr merge' is the only truly accurate way
[23:06] <Peaker> yeah I guess I'll do that
[23:13] <Peaker> how do I check if a branch is pull'able, without pulling it?
[23:13] <Peaker> I don't want to run merge if its pull'able
[23:13] <Peaker> I do want to get uncommited changes so I can diff them
[23:13] <Peaker> (for review purposes)
[23:14] <Peaker> what is the "recommended" reviewing strategy?
[23:15] <beuno> Peaker, bzr missing
[23:15] <beuno> will tell you what the difference between branches is
[23:15] <Peaker> oh, so if he's not missing anything from me there's no divergence so pull would work
[23:15] <beuno> what revisions one has that the other doesn't
[23:15] <beuno> Peaker, exactly
[23:15] <Peaker> cool thanks
[23:15] <beuno> :D
[23:16] <Peaker> so if I use merge it will basically be a pull-as-uncommitted?
[23:16] <Peaker> so for review I can always just use "merge" I guess..
[23:16] <beuno> Peaker, pretty much, yes
[23:16] <beuno> merge does introduce conflicts and such
[23:16] <beuno> but I guess that concept would work
[23:16] <Peaker> I think "bzr merge" should probably warn you when you could have pulled, it creates an unnecessary revision
[23:17] <Peaker> I don't think conflicts can exist if its pullable
[23:17] <beuno> Peaker, no, only in merges
[23:17] <Peaker> yeah its probably important to know of conflicts when you review it before merger
[23:17] <jelmer> Peaker, there is 'bzr merge --pull'
[23:18] <jelmer> Peaker, which will pull if possible, merge otherwise
[23:18] <Peaker> jelmer: yeah I know but I thought of my case as a reviewer who uses bzr merge, but I guess that's silly, I already know that from "bzr missing"