[patch][merge] sftp/http tweaks

[John Arbash Meinel]

Robey Pointer wrote:
> 
> On 9 Jan 2006, at 10:56, John Arbash Meinel wrote:
> 
>> Robey Pointer wrote:
>>
>>> Since my bzr.robey branch only had 2 un-integrated patches in it   (when
>>> compared to bzr.dev), I blew it away, did a fresh branch from   bzr.dev,
>>> and applied just those 2 patches.
>>>
>>> 1516: change http url parsing to use urlparse, and use the ui_factory
>>> to ask for a password if necessary
>>> 1517: allow forcing the use of paramiko via environ var; use prefetch
>>> on paramiko >= 1.5.2"
>>>
>>> So I'd like to resubmit those for merge and/or feedback.
>>>
>>> The branch is at http://www.lag.net/~robey/bzr.robey/
>>>
>>> robey
>>
>>
>> Have you always had dots over the 'o' in your name?
>>
>> I just saw that your latest commits were from 'Röbey Pointer'.  Grepping
>> through the revision store, I see about 41 commits, and only the  last 2
>> with ö. And your email name doesn't have them either.
> 
> 
> Oops, that was just from testing the 'whoami' stuff earlier. :)  I 
> sometimes use an umlauted-o for the same reason Spinal Tap do it, but 
> it's not actually a part of my name.  No harm either way.
> 
> 
>> Is there a reason that you check os.environ at the time of reading the
>> file, rather than doing that as part of _get_ssh_vendor()?
> 
> 
> Not particularly. :)  Your suggestions sound good to me so I applied 
> them: BZR_SSH is checked instead, and can be used to override the 
> vendor check completely.  The paramiko version check is done at the 
> top, and I used getattr instead of hasattr.
> 
> This change is now @1520 on bzr.robey.
> 
> robey

Well, I kind of like these changes, but they are mixed in with the
lsprof changes. So we kind of have to wait for both of them to get +1.
(I don't really feel like cherrypicking).
Also, I'm not sure about the revno 1518:
  a missing final revision spec (aka '1501..')
  is implicitly a '-1', not a '0'
I know for 'bzr diff' we went for an explicit None means working tree.
Which I think is broken in your branch (since it would get the -1,
before getting a chance to detect that it was None).

So I guess I would +1 revisions 1516, 1517, and 1520. If you reverted
1518, and get +2 to the --lsprof changes, I'll merge your branch.

(To revert a single revision, you can do: bzr merge -r 1518..1517 .,
this will undo the changes, and then you can 'bzr commit -m "reverted
1518"')

John
=:->


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 256 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20060110/b727b54f/attachment.pgp