Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] remote-bzr: couple of fixes

> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>>> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> The previous version had an indentation bug (did I mention I hate python?).
>>>>
>>>> A few fixes to be applied on top of the massive changes already queued. Nothing
>>>> major.
>>>
>>> [2/2] may not matter much in the context of my tree (people would
>>> use post 1.8.2 fast-export if they are using remote-bzr from 1.8.3
>>> from my tree ;-),
>>
>> Maybe, but if even if they have the latest git, pushing a tag will
>> fail miserably, and with the patch it would fail nicely :)
>>
>>> but [1/2] sounds like it is a good thing to have
>>> in 1.8.3 (not "on top of that 'massive' series").
>>>
>>> Assuming the "otherwise some version of bzr might barf" problem is
>>> that repo.generate_revision_history() in those versions may not
>>> apply str() to its first parameter and the caller is expected to
>>> pass a string there, or something?
>>
>> No, there's no change to repo.generate_revision_history(), because we
>> already convert the elements of the array to strings, it's the other
>> callers of Marks::to_rev() that see a change, namely code that pushes
>> to a remote, I think.
>>
>> And BTW, they are already strings, but unicode strings, because they
>> come from a json file, somehow bazaar doesn't like that, but it works
>> fine in my machine without the patch. Shrugs.
>>
>> Also, the emacs developers seem to be fine with all these changes,
>> there's only one patch pending that I need to cleanup.
>
> So do you want to queue these on top of the "massive" in 'next', not
> directly on 'master'?