John A Meinel wrote:
> Alexander Belchenko wrote:
>> It seems that support for bugs in commit breaks compatibility
>> in bundles with old bzr.
>
> Well, older clients don't understand the 'bugs:' revision property.
Older clients don't understand what a 'bugs:' revision-property means,
but they shouldn't need to understand that in order to roundtrip the
property accurately.
> I think the real answer is that we shouldn't be creating a 'bugs:'
> property unless there are actual bugs mentioned.
I disagree. I think that may be a fine short-term solution, but the
real bug is the way the bundles code handles empty properties.
Aaron
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
John A Meinel wrote:
> Alexander Belchenko wrote:
>> It seems that support for bugs in commit breaks compatibility
>> in bundles with old bzr.
>
> Well, older clients don't understand the 'bugs:' revision property.
Older clients don't understand what a 'bugs:' revision-property means,
but they shouldn't need to understand that in order to roundtrip the
property accurately.
> I think the real answer is that we shouldn't be creating a 'bugs:'
> property unless there are actual bugs mentioned.
I disagree. I think that may be a fine short-term solution, but the
real bug is the way the bundles code handles empty properties.
Aaron enigmail. mozdev. org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://
iD8DBQFGLm9J0F+ nu1YWqI0RAq02AJ 4oXd/zTq8dvNTbv 7lN7FIYpWQsTwCd E5XT 8WGby0Sk=
gTkbaxpWj61r5Rp
=FI1p
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----