[patch][merge] sftp/http tweaks

[John Arbash Meinel]

Robey Pointer wrote:
> 
> On 10 Jan 2006, at 12:53, John Arbash Meinel wrote:
> 
>> 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"')
> 
> 
> The "diff" patch is superceded by the later patch (which I think you 
> already have in jam-integration now), and I have the lsprof changes 
> elsewhere, so I'll just uncommit back to 1517 and apply the new patch 
> back on top.  There, done. :)
> 
> robey

So, I'm +1 on your changes. We just need to get another.

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/20060111/7d0b6db0/attachment.pgp