Loom

Please notify when a thread becomes empty

Bug #195133 reported by James Westby on 2008-02-24

This bug affects 1 person

Affects		Status	Importance	Assigned to	Milestone
	Loom	Fix Released	High	Unassigned

Bug Description

Hi,

When a thread is accepted upstream unchanged then it becomes
empty while doing an up-thread merge. It would be great if
there could be an info() or similar warning the user of this.

It may also be nice to have an option to up-thread to automatically
do the combine-thread if this happens, but that is less important,
and perhaps not desirable.

Thanks,

James

Related branches

lp://staging/bzr-loom

Merged into lp://staging/~launchpad-pqm/bzr-loom/trunk at revision 48

Paul Hummer (community): Approve on 2010-08-05

Revision history for this message

Robert Collins (lifeless) wrote on 2008-02-24: Re: [Bug 195133] [NEW] Please notify when a thread becomes empty

importance high
status triaged

This is in the TODO in the source tree already; its definitely a good
thing to do.

-Rob
--
GPG key available at: <http://www.robertcollins.net/keys.txt>.
>

Changed in bzr-loom:
importance:	Undecided → High
status:	New → Triaged

Revision history for this message

James Westby (james-w) wrote on 2008-02-24:

On Sun, 2008-02-24 at 21:19 +0000, Robert Collins wrote:
> importance high
> status triaged
>
> This is in the TODO in the source tree already; its definitely a good
> thing to do.

I thought it would be, but that TODO is pretty big at the moment :)

This sounds like quite an easy thing to do, a conditional on
an tree.changes_from(other_tree).has_changed(), so I might
well have a stab at this one when I have a little time.

Thanks,

James

Revision history for this message

James Westby (james-w) wrote on 2008-02-24:

loom-up-thread-empty.diff Edit (6.4 KiB, text/plain)

Hi,

What do you know, the change was that easy that I could do it
tonight. (Assuming I got it right of course).

Attached is the merge directive containing my change.

I'm not that happy about the change to the other test, but as
the thread was created to be empty it means that the
message is correct.

The other issue that I have is the check for the return of
the merge_inner function, is that the correct thing to do?
If it is omitted the conflicts test fails, as the only change
in the thread is the addition of a file, and has_changed then
misses this. I think it is the right thing, but I would like
confirmation.

Thanks,

James