Mark Triggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> By the way, speaking of merging, I've just noticed that if I'm
> in the *tla-revisions* buffer, move my point over a particular revision
> and do "S" to star-merge it, all of the missing revisions get merged
> in, not only the one I was interested in.
[...]
> That first arm of the IF is the one being entered. Does anyone know
> if this behaviour is a bug or a feature?
As you like ;-)
At first, it was a "feature", but if you need to star-merge only to a
given revision, it's a bug.
> If it's a feature, what's the normal way of only star-merging a
> particular revision?
Same question if we modify the behavior for what you expect. Then,
"What's the normal way to star-merge all the revisions".
I suggest :
C-u S => Star-merge all revisions
S => Star-merge only up to this revision
--
Matthieu
