Comment 3 for bug 842695

On 06.09.2011 15:44, John Arbash Meinel wrote:
> I would guess this is intentional, but I'd like to find out more what
> you expect.
>
> namely, "--include-merges" is telling you the revision that was the
> original change, while '--no-include-merges' (default) is telling you
> what mainline revision merged a change.

I'd expect both mainline and non-mainline revisions to show. --include-*
to me implies adding information, but not removing some.

But more to the point, I'd have expected the output to mention those
commits that actually affected the named directory, instead of what
appears to me to be completely unrelated commits. So I'd have expected
the output to start like this:

5638: Canonical.com P... 2011-01-28 [merge] (vila) Mark test failure...
  5636.1.2: Vincent Ladeuil 2011-01-28 Raise KnownFailure on windows...
  5636.1.1: Vincent Ladeuil 2011-01-28 Get rid of the useless __init__.
5277: Canonical.com P... 2010-06-02 [merge] (lifeless) Tab-complete ...
  5255.4.4: Martin von Gagern 2010-05-29 Properly import bzrlib.test...
  5255.4.3: Martin von Gagern 2010-05-29 [merge] Fix test_revspec_ta...
    0.36.1: Martin von Gagern 2010-05-29 Fix test_revspec_tag_endran...
  5255.4.2: Martin von Gagern 2010-05-26 Adjust selftest for renamed...
...