Review request for actions outlined in bug 801714

[Martin Pool]

On 12 July 2011 08:02, Max Bowsher <_ at maxb.eu> wrote:
> This bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/udd/+bug/801714 is a miscellany of
> import repairs falling under the common heading of removing incorrectly
> done imports of new upstream versions.
>
> I now have jubany access, so can enact these myself - but before I start
> wielding ./delete_branches_from_lp.py, I wouldn't mind someone glancing
> over my proposed actions and confirming they're happy.

Thanks for addressing that and for asking for review.  I want to make
sure I understand the impact of these changes.

The key point is

maxb>> In all cases, the fix involves truncating the imports back to
before the mistake was made, so that the importer can proceed normally
again.

So what are the revisions that will be evicted from these branches
when they're truncated, and does it matter that they are?

Looking at for instance
<https://code.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-branches/ubuntu/oneiric/accerciser/oneiric>
vs <https://code.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-branches/ubuntu/maverick/accerciser/maverick>,
it seems it's always a commit by an Ubuntu developer bringing in a new
upstream with a simple commit, which is pretty much what bug 494481
says.  So those revisions will be lost, but the moral equivalent will
be recreated by the updated import of the package.

It seems reasonably safe to me.

494481 is getting to be quite a long bug because of the specific
packages discussed there.  I'm not sure how we would specifically
detect someone trying to bring in a new upstream without using
merge-upstream.  Do you have an idea?

m