Re: [StGIT PATCH 2/4] Abstract a PatchSet object out of Series.

From: Yann Dirson <ydirson@altern.org>
Date: Jun 13, 2007, 20:38 UTC
Message-ID: <20070613203821.GQ6992@nan92-1-81-57-214-146.fbx.proxad.net>
In-Reply-To: <b0943d9e0706121509j5088e164iadedb561501d6a55@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 11:09:50PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:

Show 7 quoted lines

> On 11/06/07, Yann Dirson <ydirson@altern.org> wrote:
> >The goal is to move into PatchSet all functionnality that is not
> >dependant of Series being a real stack, paving the way for handling
> >parallel (hydra) stacks, or any other way to organize patches.
> 
> Thanks for the patches. I applied this one as well and I like the
> idea. What is your long-term plan with this split?

I have started to work on a Hydra class (available at [1], but be aware it doesn't do much more than creating an octopus, and breaking many current StGIT assumptions), with a testcase to demonstrate its use), which binds together a set of stacks with an octopus, to allow keeping related patches together, and allow people to pull from one topic stack without getting unrelated work.

I'm however facing a problem, with the pervasive assumption that we only have stacks :). Basically, we probably need a factory of PatchSet objects, which would return a Series or an Hydra according to the specified name - I'm currently thinking about this, but don't expect any working code too rapidly.

> The HEAD in my repository fails the test suite. Do you have any
> additional patches pending (some patches were not applied in order as
> I had to manually fix the conflicts). Anyway, please check my
> repository for any missing patches.

Oh, I had not noticed you had applied bd69feaf7c3c94b6e7e216ea8091064af9cdfa97. Sorry, I was not explicit enough when posing this, only the cover mail included "RFC" in the subject. As described in that mail, there are problems both with the original approach (Karl's test failing), and with that new one (that exisiting test failing).

Do you have any idea on how we could overcome the problem ? In the meantime, we could possibly just comment that testcase out (or add support for continuing the testsuite even with a failure) - the problem it exhibits is probably less common than the one that was fixed.

BTW, a02ba4077f12578fe31c99d903488804a656e1c4 has a slight problem: it is a patch by Karl, which I re-sent in the same group since it was exhibiting the problem (and with the intent of adding a signed-off-by line, but my way of adding them trough a buggy template showed its limits and the commit now have 2 signed-off-by lines with Karl's name). However, it was applied with myself as author, which is quite wrong: could that be a but in "stg import" ignoring the Author field ?

Best regards,

-- 
Yann.

[1] http://repo.or.cz/w/stgit/ydirson.git