Comment 3 for bug 124859
Revision history for this message
| Robert Collins (lifeless) wrote Re: [Bug 124859] incorrect repository detected with symlink to a branch | #3 |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
f33e652
(Get the code!)
On Mon, 2007-07-09 at 13:38 +0000, Aaron Bentley wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Robert Collins wrote:
> > The cause is that the branch object for 'link' has not followed the
> > symlink
>
> I disagree that following the symlink is The Right Thing.
In some places I agree with you, in others I don't.
> The symlink may well be a versioned file, so the containing directory is
> the correct place to search. This allows "bzr log link" to give the
> version history of the symlink, while bzr log "subproject/
> give the version history of the subtree.
I think getting the log for the history of 'link' in the tree link is in
should be possible. Right now its not possible at all.
I don't have a strong opinion as to what should be the default, but I
strongly believe that we should support *both* following the symlink for
the Branch object, and logging the history of 'link' itself too.
I'm not sure how we should expose this.
> Following the symlink would mean that there would be no way to get the
> version history of the symlink, and would have even worse effects with
> "commit", "merge", "revert" et al.
This is overgeneralising what I was reporting. At the moment the
situation I created is already totally broken. I was not suggesting
changing how we track versioning of symlink - I am talking about the
behaviour of 'BzrDir.open(PATH)' exclusively.
> In sum, symlinks are first-class entities in Bazaar, so it does not make
> sense to follow them.
They are first class entities, but that does not preclude following them
at appropriate times.
-Rob
--
GPG key available at: <http://