[07:57] <mgz> morning!
[08:00] <jelmer> moin
[08:07] <mgz> jelmer: shall we pre-thingy mumble even if jam isn't back in time?
[08:27] <jelmer> mgz: sure
[08:28] <jelmer> mgz: ?
[08:31] <mgz> jelmer: hopping on
[08:42] <quotemstr> There's no interactive rebase for bazaar, is there?
[08:42] <jelmer> quotemstr: no interactive rebase, no
[08:47] <jelmer> mgz: still there?
[08:50] <mgz> jelmer: yup
[15:39] <delinquentme> OK so if i've got the primary repo with --no-trees
[15:39] <delinquentme> and a branch of the primary repo
[15:39] <delinquentme> then I copy the files from that branch ... back into the primary repo
[15:39] <delinquentme> will anything within the /.bzr dir have changed in the primary repo?
[15:41] <mgz> what do you mean by "copy"?
[15:46] <delinquentme> mgz, like a shell command of $ cp the_branched_dir /trunk
[15:50] <mgz> right, so genenerally you don't want to do that with branches under shared repositories, use branch to move stuff from one to another
[15:51] <mgz> `bzr branch`, that is.
[15:52] <mgz> cp then `bzr reconfigure` is safe in a limited set of circumstances, and you risk breaking things with it if you get it wrong.
[16:40] <delinquentme> mgz, so basically in the situation above ...
[16:40] <delinquentme> can I just delete all the files which I CPed in
[16:40] <delinquentme> and leave the .bzr dir and it will be peachy =]?
[16:44] <mgz> delinquentme: yup
[16:44] <mgz> provided you mean also removing the branch/.bzr but leaving .bzr for the repo
[16:45] <mgz> then doing `bzr branch` to copy the old branch under the new repo
[16:59] <SamB_MacG5> huh, the test directory isolation code doesn't normalize URLs ...
[17:03] <SamB_MacG5> so, say, TMPDIR=/var/folders/4b/4b+Qm+OQFj8f23emq17tBU+++TM/-Tmp-/ can cause problems, though perhaps not in bzr's own tests
[17:06] <SamB_MacG5> (Thankfully, the fact that /var actually a symlink to private/var seems not to be a problem.)
[18:35] <SamB_MacG5> ... is there some secret development channel that nobody told me about, or has bzr, like, died or something?
[18:47] <jelmer> no, there is no cabal ;)
[18:47] <jelmer> see the recent lwn article
[18:49] <SamB_MacG5> hmm, that could be an issue if I want to build a Haskell package in the future...
[18:49] <jelmer> SamB_MacG5: hehe
[18:50] <SamB_MacG5> ookay, why does google think "lwn" is a synonym for "vs" ?
[18:50] <jelmer> heh, no idea
[18:51] <SamB_MacG5> you mean https://lwn.net/Articles/515652/, which is evidently paywalled for the next 3 days?
[18:52] <jelmer> ah, yes
[18:52] <jelmer> sorry
[18:53] <jelmer> it is based on a public thread on the mailing list though
[18:59] <SamB_MacG5> how did the thread get so fragmented ....
[19:01]  * jelmer v
[19:02]  * jelmer blames certain individu als