Mon Jan 11 16:03:34 EST 2010  Daniel Dickison <danieldickison@gmail.com>
  * Accept issue1726: Files with _darcs prefix are always boring

Attachments

• accept-issue1726_-files-with-_darcs-prefix-are-always-boring.dpatch
• unnamed

Sorry about the review delay.

Daniel Dickison wrote:
> Mon Jan 11 16:03:34 EST 2010  Daniel Dickison <danieldickison@gmail.com>
>   * Accept issue1726: Files with _darcs prefix are always boring

> +# Passing --boring should definitely succeed.
> +touch _darcsfoo
> +darcs whatsnew -ls --boring
> +darcs add --boring _darcsfoo
> +darcs revert -a _darcsfoo
> +
> +# Without --boring, it should succeed given the default boring file.
> +touch _darcsfoo
> +darcs whatsnew -ls
> +darcs add _darcsfoo
> +darcs revert -a _darcsfoo

I'm concerned that using "_darcsfoo" both times might trip unrelated
bugs in pending.  I suggest using _darcsbar the second time, and
simply doing a normal record.

    touch _darcsfoo
    darcs whatsnew -ls --boring
    darcs record --look-for-adds --boring _darcsfoo

    touch _darcsbar
    darcs whatsnew -ls --boring
    darcs record --look-for-adds --boring _darcsbar

> +# The actual _darcs directory should always be skipped.
> +not darcs add -r _darcs
> +not darcs add -r --boring _darcs

Good.

> +# ...as well as user-created files under _darcs (?)
> +touch _darcs/foo
> +not darcs add _darcs/foo

Good.

> +cd ..
> +rm -rf R

I think convention is now not to bother cleaning up after oneself.

On Jan 13, 2010, at 9:59 PM, Trent W. Buck wrote:

> Trent W. Buck <trentbuck@gmail.com> added the comment:
> 
> Daniel Dickison wrote:
>> Mon Jan 11 16:03:34 EST 2010  Daniel Dickison <danieldickison@gmail.com>
>>  * Accept issue1726: Files with _darcs prefix are always boring
> 
>> +# Passing --boring should definitely succeed.
>> +touch _darcsfoo
>> +darcs whatsnew -ls --boring
>> +darcs add --boring _darcsfoo
>> +darcs revert -a _darcsfoo
>> +
>> +# Without --boring, it should succeed given the default boring file.
>> +touch _darcsfoo
>> +darcs whatsnew -ls
>> +darcs add _darcsfoo
>> +darcs revert -a _darcsfoo
> 
> I'm concerned that using "_darcsfoo" both times might trip unrelated
> bugs in pending.  I suggest using _darcsbar the second time, and
> simply doing a normal record.
> 
>    touch _darcsfoo
>    darcs whatsnew -ls --boring
>    darcs record --look-for-adds --boring _darcsfoo
> 
>    touch _darcsbar
>    darcs whatsnew -ls --boring
>    darcs record --look-for-adds --boring _darcsbar

My thought was to use `--boring' for the first pass to test the hardcoded stuff, then without that flag the second time to test the default boring file.  It would make sense to use different filenames for the two, though, like you said (though I think that would still require a `revert' between the two in order to test `whatsnew').

As far as I can tell, `record' doesn't take the --boring flag (though maybe it should?).  Also, if we do use `record' instead of `add', I presume we also need to pass `--all' so it doesn't get stuck at the prompt?

Daniel Dickison wrote:
> On Jan 13, 2010, at 9:59 PM, Trent W. Buck wrote:
>> I'm concerned that using "_darcsfoo" both times might trip unrelated
>> bugs in pending.  I suggest using _darcsbar the second time, and
>> simply doing a normal record.
>>
>>    touch _darcsfoo
>>    darcs whatsnew -ls --boring
>>    darcs record --look-for-adds --boring _darcsfoo
>>
>>    touch _darcsbar
>>    darcs whatsnew -ls --boring
>>    darcs record --look-for-adds --boring _darcsbar
>
> As far as I can tell, `record' doesn't take the --boring flag
> (though maybe it should?).

Oops.  By all means, use "add", then.

> Also, if we do use `record' instead of `add', I presume we also need
> to pass `--all' so it doesn't get stuck at the prompt?

Yep.  I habitually use rec -lam instead of add + record.

> (though I think that would still require a `revert' between the two
> in order to test `whatsnew').

Recorded changes won't show up in w -l.

Thu Jan 14 01:34:06 EST 2010  Daniel Dickison <danieldickison@gmail.com>
  * Accept issue1726: Files with _darcs prefix are always boring

Attachments

• accept-issue1726_-files-with-_darcs-prefix-are-always-boring.dpatch
• unnamed

Sorry, I sent the previous amended patch before seeing Trent's message in the 
patch136 thread.  This one contains tests for all of suggested the variations of 
_darcs that is expected to fail.

Attachments

• accept-issue1726_-files-with-_darcs-prefix-are-always-boring.dpatch

Hi Trent, may I ping you on this?  It seems to be blocking patch136
Thanks!

Eric Kow wrote:
> Hi Trent, may I ping you on this?  It seems to be blocking patch136

Sorry about the huge delay.  I went to apply this to HEAD, and I got
this:

    darcs: bug in get_extra commuting patches:
    First patch is:
    Wed Aug 12 08:06:16 EST 2009  Marco Túlio Gontijo e Silva <marcot@riseup.net>
      * Regression test for issue1317.
    Second patch is:
    Mon Aug 24 21:04:37 EST 2009  Eric Kow <kowey@darcs.net>
      * Mark issue1317 test as failing (and note issue number).

On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 10:15:08 +0000, Trent W. Buck wrote:
> Sorry about the huge delay.  I went to apply this to HEAD, and I got
> this:
> 
>     darcs: bug in get_extra commuting patches:
>     First patch is:
>     Wed Aug 12 08:06:16 EST 2009  Marco Túlio Gontijo e Silva <marcot@riseup.net>
>       * Regression test for issue1317.
>     Second patch is:
>     Mon Aug 24 21:04:37 EST 2009  Eric Kow <kowey@darcs.net>
>       * Mark issue1317 test as failing (and note issue number).

I always get this if I apply patches from the tracker straight from
mutt.  I have to hit C-e in the attachment viewer and change the MIME
type (some part from us-ascii to utf-8).  Either that or just d/l the
patch from the web interface.

I don't suppose that's the issue for you?

I think I need to investigate this...

-- 
Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow>
PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9

Sorry for the delay Daniel.  As Trent points out, we need to work on our
chasing up a bit more.  This looks good.

This patch bundle (with 1 patches) was just applied to the repository http://darcs.net/.
This message was brought to you by DarcsWatch
http://darcswatch.nomeata.de/repo_http:__darcs.net_.html#bundle-3a2c61f95e57d7a31fc90ef8f12aa298b2318653

This patch bundle (with 1 patches) was just applied to the repository http://darcs.net/reviewed.
This message was brought to you by DarcsWatch
http://darcswatch.nomeata.de/repo_http:__darcs.net_reviewed.html#bundle-3a2c61f95e57d7a31fc90ef8f12aa298b2318653