Merge lp:~vila/bzr/671050-config-policy into lp:bzr
| Status: | Merged | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Approved by: | Vincent Ladeuil on 2010-11-17 | ||||
| Approved revision: | 5534 | ||||
| Merged at revision: | 5542 | ||||
| Proposed branch: | lp:~vila/bzr/671050-config-policy | ||||
| Merge into: | lp:bzr | ||||
| Diff against target: |
178 lines (+69/-3) 4 files modified
bzrlib/config.py (+13/-1) bzrlib/tests/blackbox/test_config.py (+32/-0) bzrlib/tests/test_config.py (+20/-2) doc/en/release-notes/bzr-2.3.txt (+4/-0) |
||||
| To merge this branch: | bzr merge lp:~vila/bzr/671050-config-policy | ||||
| Related bugs: |
|
| Reviewer | Review Type | Date Requested | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Martin Pool | 2010-11-08 | Approve on 2010-11-17 | |
|
Review via email:
|
|||
Commit Message
Takes config policies into account and display the section names when needed.
Description of the Change
This fixes bug #671050 by taking the option policies into account when displaying the value.
I also add displaying the section name when the option definitions are found in locations.conf.
- 5535. By Vincent Ladeuil on 2010-11-12
-
Merge bzr.dev into 671050-
config- policy
| John A Meinel (jameinel) wrote : | # |
| Vincent Ladeuil (vila) wrote : | # |
>>>>> John A Meinel <email address hidden> writes:
> This looks like it contains code that I've already reviewed.
Really ? I don't have any trace of such a review... Did you approve it ?
:-D
> It has the [.../tree] sections, which seems unrelated.
It *is* related as mentioned in the news entry (and the commit message):
``bzr config`` will now respect option policies when displaying the
value and display the definition sections when appropriate.
While fixing this bug I realized I didn't have tests where the same
option was defined in several section in the same config file which
requires displaying the section name. The lines you're referring to are
a fallout.
> Are we sure it isn't a second submission of the same code?
Are you sure you didn't read it in the commit ML instead ?
I remember a discussion though, so may be it was on IRC and you didn't
put your comments in the mp (can't find it though) ?
| Martin Pool (mbp) wrote : | # |
That looks reasonable. The comment you add:
+ # Display only the first value and exit (We need to use
+ # get_user_option to take policies into account and we need
+ # to make sure the option exists too :-/)
+ self.outf.
makes me wonder if it should have an XXX, especially the emoticon? Or is there just missing punctuation and could be a little clearer?
- 5536. By Vincent Ladeuil on 2010-11-17
-
Tweak comment as per poolie's suggestion.
| Vincent Ladeuil (vila) wrote : | # |
sent to pqm by email
| Vincent Ladeuil (vila) wrote : | # |
sent to pqm by email
| Vincent Ladeuil (vila) wrote : | # |
sent to pqm by email
- 5537. By Vincent Ladeuil on 2010-11-18
-
Merge bzr.dev into 671050-
config- policy

This looks like it contains code that I've already reviewed. It has the [.../tree] sections, which seems unrelated.
Are we sure it isn't a second submission of the same code?