[ANNOUNCE] bzrtools-54 [PATCH] allow tracking a baz project

John A Meinel john at arbash-meinel.com
Fri Jun 3 16:54:54 BST 2005

Aaron Bentley wrote:

> Thanks again, John.  I'll wait on the corrected patch, but this will be
> a great improvement, and I'll probably have to make another release.

> If you want to add a --fast option for os.rename, that would be fine
> with me.
I'll probably rewrite the option handling a little bit, so as to get
this sort of thing. I'll just put in an optparse section.

> | And finally, it would be possible to actually do slightly diverged trees
> | with this method. You just have to find the latest Arch-x: revision and
> | merge from there. However, I don't think we want to tell people that it
> | is okay to develop in the same directory that they are keeping in sync
> | with another tree.
> That's pretty neat.  You'd have to commit that as a merge, for it to
> work in any sane way, and we don't have the right kind of metadata for
> it to work long-term, but being able to merge Arch branches into bzr
> branches would definitely be cool.
Sure. I think we'll keep this on the backburner for once we have real

> | I tested on the same tree, and things seemed to work.
> Also, run "baz2bzr test" if you don't mind.

This completed just fine with the current code.

> Aaron

The attached patch seems to work correctly, such that if there are any
problems, it backs out correctly (not modifying output_dir).
baz2bzr test doesn't report anything (just 'running tests'), which since
you are using doctest I believe means everything passed successfully.

I'm having some problems with the tree that I am trying to merge,
though. If I do the normal update and rename, it seems to be okay, but
when I try to do the 'merge' route, I get an exception about an id not
having a path associated with.

This is the same tree that I was having trouble with earlier, and the
error seems about the same, just occurring in a different location.
Testing on a limited section of the tree seems to work. So it seems that
somewhere along the line my arch archive is doing something that bzr
doesn't like.

I'll let you know if I find out more. In the meantime the attached patch
passes both the 'does it work' and 'does it fail safely' tests.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20050603/1cc8d587/attachment.pgp 

More information about the bazaar mailing list