[RFC] Allow error definitions outside bzrlib.errors?
andrew.bennetts at canonical.com
Tue Aug 11 10:08:32 BST 2009
Martin Pool wrote:
> 2009/8/11 Vincent Ladeuil <v.ladeuil+lp at free.fr>:
> > Right, but the proposal is still to defined such errors as
> > inheriting from BzrError right ?
> > So the payoff will only be when we clean bzrlib.errors from the
> > specific errors than can be declared in modules.
> > I'd really prefer that we keep *some* errors defined there if
> > only the generic ones.
> As I see it: general errors in bzrlib.errors; module-specific or
> related errors in that module; everything inheriting from BzrError
> unless there's a good reason otherwise.
Yes, that's what I was thinking too.
More information about the bazaar