Merge lp:~gary/bzr/bug835035 into lp:bzr/2.3
Proposed by
Gary Poster
Status: | Merged |
---|---|
Approved by: | John A Meinel |
Approved revision: | no longer in the source branch. |
Merged at revision: | 5661 |
Proposed branch: | lp:~gary/bzr/bug835035 |
Merge into: | lp:bzr/2.3 |
Diff against target: |
70 lines (+16/-6) 3 files modified
bzrlib/remote.py (+2/-1) bzrlib/repository.py (+2/-1) bzrlib/tests/per_repository_reference/__init__.py (+12/-4) |
To merge this branch: | bzr merge lp:~gary/bzr/bug835035 |
Related bugs: |
Reviewer | Review Type | Date Requested | Status |
---|---|---|---|
John A Meinel | Needs Fixing | ||
Review via email: mp+73124@code.launchpad.net |
Description of the change
This branch fixes bug 835035 for the 2.3 line. It includes a test and a fix. It's fairly straightforward: we don't want to lock the repository that we might stack on until we are sure it will work.
The XXX comment is my biggest concern: it is being run for all formats, when I really only want it to run for local and remote repositories. I'm not sure how to address this, or if it is necessary to do so.
I also intend to provide changes for 2.4 and trunk, but I'd like to do them one at a time so I can learn what is necessary.
Thank you,
Gary
To post a comment you must log in.
I would tend to say that we should just be more aggressive about unlocking if we're holding the lock and it fails. My big concern is that _check_ fallback_ repository needs to read data from the repository, and we'd like to hold the read lock so that anything we read stays cached.
However, if you can't see an easy way to do that, this patch would be ok.