Comment 31 for bug 474807

I'd like the duplicate status to be removed. 476293 is about about expected errors in "bzr log -rX..Y", while the present bug is about understanding the output of "bzr log -rX..Y".
So first I'd like a reply on my post of 2010-02-10.
Second, yet another colleague was confused by "bzr log -rX..Y" today, here's a digest of what he wrote:
<quoting him>
sh> bzr branch -rtag:mysql-5.1.41 mysql-5.1 5.1.41
sh> bzr branch -rtag:mysql-5.1.42 mysql-5.1 5.1.42
sh> (cd 5.1.41 && bzr log -n0 --show-ids | grep "<email address hidden>")
sh> (cd 5.1.42 && bzr log -n0 --show-ids | grep "<email address hidden>")
parent: <email address hidden>
revision-id: <email address hidden>
sh> (cd 5.1.42 && bzr log -n0 --show-ids -rtag:mysql-5.1.41.. | grep "<email address hidden>")
parent: <email address hidden>
i.e
1) <email address hidden> is not in 5.1.41 = correct
2) <email address hidden> is in 5.1.42 = correct
3) <email address hidden> does now show in revisions created from 5.1.41 to 5.1.42 = bug ?
</quoting him>
See, he had the same expectation that with -rX..Y he should be seeing the revisions created from 5.1.41 to 5.1.42.
I explained to him that a mere mortal cannot understand what "bzr log -rX..Y" is expected to return, and that he should use "bzr missing --include-merges" between mysql-5.1.41 and mysql-5.1.42 instead.
Still, his interpretation matches the one I had before this bug report was started. I think people in the MySQL group are generally confused by "bzr log -rX..Y". I suspect "bzr help log" could be clarified a bit.