[MERGE] RevisionSpec.in_history() should raise nicer errors

Martin Pool mbp at canonical.com
Wed Aug 23 22:13:04 BST 2006

On 23 Aug 2006, Aaron Bentley <aaron.bentley at utoronto.ca> wrote:

> > On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 15:22 -0500, John Arbash Meinel wrote:
> >> Currently with bzr, if you do 'bzr log -r10000' you get a NoSuchRevision
> >> exception, which is an internal exception, meant for indicating you are
> >> missing something from your repository.
> >>
> >> Also, it turned out that while we tested the very basic revision spec
> >> functionality, we didn't do much error or edge case testing.
> >>
> >> The attached patch adds a new error: InvalidRevisionSpec, which gets
> >> formatted into a much nicer user error.
> I'm in favor of this direction, but I haven't reviewed the code closely
> enough to give a +1.  I figured the changes were too much for 0.10, but
> decided to wait and see what Robert said.

I'll go along with Robert there.

I suspect this fixes some reported bugs - could you have a look, John, if you
have not already, and add it to NEWS?

> > So I'd rather say 'lets get this really right for 0.11 and not change
> > for 0.10'.
> These NoSuchRevision errors are a pretty big wart.  Should we consider
> catching them in as a special case in 0.10?  That would be a very small
> modification.

Or perhaps making them print out in short form as a user error?


More information about the bazaar mailing list