vila | oh, hi all ! | 09:08 |
---|---|---|
mgz | morning all | 09:36 |
jelmer | hi mgz, vila | 09:37 |
vila | _o/ | 09:38 |
lelit | hi everybody! I'm trying to understand the "remove-branch" command, and fail to see its purpose. My goal is to "retire" some remote branch, after it was merged in trunk and thus not anymore "active"... | 09:39 |
lelit | trying that command, I see it apparently deletes only the .bzr/branch subdir of the branch... | 09:39 |
lelit | given that the remote branches are in a "shared" repo (for a given user), is it safe to simply "rm -rf" the single branch, or does that corrupt the shared repo in some way? | 09:41 |
mgz | lelit: it's safe. | 09:43 |
lelit | great, thanks. OOC, do you know the purpose of the remove-branch command? when is it useful? | 09:47 |
mgz | lelit: not removing remote workingtrees with it is arguably a bug. mostly it rmbranch does just boil down to rm, the command exists so there's a consistent interface for different branch schemes | 09:57 |
lelit | I see, thank you | 09:58 |
mgz | I bet half these bzr-explorer file watcher bugs are just from accidentally including .bzr in the followed paths | 11:13 |
mgz | which then clashes with bzr trying to do internal work there at the same time | 11:13 |
vila | mgz: be bold, bet on the other half ;) | 11:15 |
mgz | the rest seems to be other misc locking/permission failures - some IDE holding files open, etc | 11:24 |
mgz | woho! failures. | 11:26 |
mgz | is there a way to get merge to not set the submit branch on things? | 11:53 |
mgz | I do too much editing of .bzr/branch/branch.conf as it is, and I merge sideways more than up. | 11:54 |
lelit | btw, a coworker yesterday asked me the difference between "submit-branch" and "push-branch", and I didn't find a satisfactory answer... | 11:57 |
vila | mgz: --no-remember | 12:28 |
vila | lelit: push_location is where push goes, submit_branch is where you merge from (the assumption is that it's where you *will* submit) | 12:29 |
lelit | thnx | 12:30 |
vila | mgz: also, 'bzr config --remove submit_branch | 12:30 |
vila | mgz: or 'bzr config submit_branch=<here, and nowhere else from now on>' | 12:30 |
mgz | ah, yes, `bzr config` is a bit easier than editing stuff in .bzr for single changes, slower when you want to nuke a bunch of stuff though :) | 12:35 |
mgz | an option to not do it in the first place would be nice, lots of merges aren't from a submit location | 12:36 |
vila | mgz: 'bzr merge --no-remember ../one-shot' ? | 13:31 |
mgz | next time I'll try and remember no remember but I doubt I'll remember | 13:34 |
mgz | okay, end of qbzr time and start of lunch time | 13:34 |
vila | .. which is why the default is --remember :-P | 13:34 |
vila | mgz: a fun one for you: try to make a test called 'test_base_dir' succeed | 13:49 |
vila | mgz: rats, the missing bit is also a spoiler :-/ The test should inherit from TestCaseInTempDir | 13:50 |
wgz | a repeat of bug 581298 maybe? :) | 14:01 |
ubot5 | Launchpad bug 581298 in Bazaar "bt.test__walkdirs_win32.TestWin32Finder.test_dir fails without ever being run" [Undecided,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/581298 | 14:01 |
vila | oooooh :) | 14:02 |
vila | indeed | 14:02 |
mgz | right, time to work out what to do with trace | 14:36 |
=== tchan1 is now known as tchan | ||
=== Quintasan_ is now known as Quintasan | ||
dannf | the libvirt/qemu-kvm UDD trees on LP seem to be hosed - attempts to branch from them give an error | 18:03 |
dannf | http://paste.ubuntu.com/762973/ | 18:04 |
dannf | is this the right place to look for help on that? | 18:04 |
jelmer | dannf: hi | 18:04 |
jelmer | dannf: this is the right place | 18:04 |
dannf | jelmer: cool | 18:05 |
jelmer | dannf: this is bug 848064 | 18:05 |
ubot5 | Launchpad bug 848064 in Ubuntu Distributed Development "Revision not present branching from udd-imported branches on lp" [Critical,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/848064 | 18:05 |
dannf | jelmer: sounds like reimporting might be an option? what does that entail? | 18:07 |
poolie | hi all | 19:51 |
wgz | hey poolie! | 20:17 |
poolie | hi there | 20:17 |
GRiD | hi poolie, wgz | 20:28 |
* wgz waves at GRiD | 20:36 | |
dvheumen | Hi, want to check something, just to be sure: If I create a symlink, add it to the working copy and then change my mind and 'bzr revert symlink'. Then it should not delete the symlink right? | 21:08 |
dvheumen | (add --> not yet commit) | 21:08 |
dvheumen | I'm asking because I think it's a bug in bzr | 21:13 |
abentley | dvheumen: No, we have special handling for files when reverting, but not for other types. If you want to unversion the symlink without deleting it, "bzr remove --keep" will do that. | 21:24 |
dvheumen | abentley, then you don't consider this undesired behavior? | 21:25 |
abentley | dvheumen: correct. | 21:25 |
dvheumen | hmm... okay ... | 21:25 |
dvheumen | btw, do you mean remove or revert? | 21:26 |
abentley | dvheumen: I mean remove. | 21:26 |
dvheumen | so, in the case of revert? | 21:27 |
dvheumen | it seems strange to me to delete something that hasn't been under control in the first place | 21:27 |
abentley | dvheumen: Revert tries to return to to your previous state. It doesn't consider how you got there. | 21:28 |
dvheumen | yeah exactly, so why delete a symlink that was 'originally' there before I added it to the working copy | 21:28 |
abentley | dvheumen: Because the previous state is the last-committed state, and that didn't have a symlink. | 21:29 |
abentley | dvheumen: We do the same with directories. | 21:29 |
dvheumen | but you make an exception for files then, doesn't that seem strange? | 21:30 |
abentley | dvheumen: Even with files, the exception is based on filetype, not based on whether you added them without committing. | 21:31 |
abentley | dvheumen: And we make that exception because deleting a file can cost the user a lot of data, whereas directories and symlinks don't contain much data in and of themselves. | 21:32 |
dvheumen | hmmm... okay, in that case it's not a bug :P | 21:32 |
dvheumen | (although I'm not completely sold on the reason ;-) | 21:32 |
dvheumen | (yet) | 21:33 |
dvheumen | thanks :) | 21:33 |
abentley | dvheumen: The more junk you leave in the way, the more you open yourself up to conflicts later on when tree updates create an entity with the same name. | 21:36 |
dvheumen | abentley, yeah, that's true. However, this symlink probably has some meaning and when I revert I would do this with a thought such as "on second thought, no I don't want to do this versioning operations". And it wouldn't occur to me that I'm actually deleting a file, changing a directory structure. | 21:37 |
dvheumen | so I'm accidentally touching something that I wouldn't expect | 21:38 |
dvheumen | although, maybe I should do some more reading, since it *is* reported that the symlink gets deleted | 21:38 |
abentley | dvheumen: Sure. But there are tradeoffs here, and there isn't *much* meaning in the symlink. | 21:39 |
dvheumen | yeah, I know :) | 21:39 |
dvheumen | I should just get used to this behavior | 21:40 |
dvheumen | anyways, you're just in time ... I hadn't yet submitted the bug report :P | 21:42 |
abentley | dvheumen: You can also use shelve --all as an alternative to revert. That will allow you to correct any surprising behaviour. | 21:42 |
dvheumen | I'll keep that in mind | 21:42 |
jelmer_ | hey poolie, welcome back | 22:09 |
poolie | hi there, thanks | 22:13 |
=== jelmer_ is now known as jelmer | ||
LeoNerd | bzr checkout; edit stuff... bzr commit --local {because the laptop was offline} | 22:41 |
LeoNerd | How do I now push it upstream? bzr push claims no location known or specified. I know I -can- copypasta from bzr info but that feels awkward and hackish | 22:41 |
LeoNerd | Ahhh.. bzr push :bound | 22:44 |
* LeoNerd read bzr help location-aliases | 22:44 | |
Noldorin_ | hi folks. | 23:20 |
Noldorin_ | is there any way to provide secure access to a bzr server other than via SSH? | 23:20 |
jelmer | Noldorin: over http/https | 23:21 |
jelmer | or, alternatively, if you don't require a smart server you can also use sftp/ftp, smb, ... | 23:22 |
Noldorin__ | jelmer sftp is still ssh... but yes the other options sound appealing. how does https speed compare to smart server? | 23:24 |
Noldorin__ | (with ssh) | 23:24 |
jelmer | Noldorin_: the smart server can be used over HTTPS as well, though it requires some setup | 23:25 |
Noldorin__ | ah right | 23:25 |
Noldorin__ | jelmer, but not ftp? | 23:25 |
jelmer | Noldorin_: right, it would be pretty hard to tunnel something custom over ftp :-) | 23:26 |
Noldorin__ | yeah heh | 23:26 |
Noldorin__ | i could imagine! | 23:26 |
Noldorin__ | jelmer, hmm will have a look, thanks for tip | 23:27 |
Noldorin__ | be back in a bit | 23:27 |
jelmer | Noldorin__: ssh should be simplest to setup though (hardly any setup at all), any reason you're not using that? | 23:27 |
Noldorin__ | jelmer, alas, windows server = ssh (almost) impossible | 23:28 |
Noldorin__ | unless some has some good tips for it | 23:28 |
Noldorin__ | tried a lot, but always some sort of error. | 23:28 |
Noldorin__ | hmm | 23:28 |
Noldorin__ | openssh for windows just isn't maintained :-( | 23:30 |
Noldorin__ | maybe there are decent commercial solutions. who knows | 23:30 |
jelmer | ah, hmm | 23:30 |
jelmer | I don't have any experience with SSH servers on Windows | 23:30 |
Noldorin__ | yeah. not sure many in the world do :-P | 23:31 |
Noldorin__ | you use openssh sshd on linux though yes? | 23:31 |
jelmer | Noldorin__: yep | 23:32 |
Noldorin__ | jelmer, maybe cygwin environment then...hard for windows services though | 23:34 |
Noldorin__ | hmm | 23:34 |
Noldorin__ | brb restarting | 23:35 |
Noldorin | jelmer, back | 23:58 |
jelmer | hi Noldorin | 23:58 |
Noldorin | hi | 23:58 |
Noldorin | did you have any thoughts while i was gone? | 23:58 |
jelmer | I had plenty, but nothing about SSH on Windows I'm afraid.. | 23:59 |
Noldorin | heh | 23:59 |
Noldorin | fair enough | 23:59 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!