Comment 20 for bug 45719

Here are John's latest comments from the mailing list - help in addressing these issues would be appreciated!

John Arbash Meinel has voted resubmit.
Status is now: Resubmit
Comment:
A few issues:

1) We need to have whitebox testing of WT.update in workingtree_implementations. This is updating the api to allow a 'revision' parameter, and we should make sure all implementations continue to do so.

2) We need a NEWS entry describing the API break (as plugins that implement a WT will now need to accept a revision in their update
function.)

3) You are using "revision[0].in_history(branch).rev_id" which should be replaced with "revision[0].as_revision_id(branch)". The latter is a newer function that doesn't have to do as much work in most cases.

4) This code still uses a form of "lookup the -r XXXX" in the local branch, and only if it can't be found look in the master branch. I feel like it should always be resolved in the master branch. That way "bzr update -r -1" is always the same as "bzr update". This was the crux of the discussion, IIRC, and why it wasn't merged way back when.

5) This is invasive enough that I don't really want it in 1.7, but I would be happy to see a cleaned up version merged into 1.8 as soon as it opens.

I didn't do a fully thorough trawl through the code, but that should be enough to refine this patch some more.

For details, see:
http://bundlebuggy.aaronbentley.com/project/bzr/request/%3C01aa01c90a40%24b45d2e00%241d178a00%24%40com.au%3E
Project: Bazaar