Merge lp://staging/~jelmer/brz/revno-order into lp://staging/brz/3.0
Proposed by
Jelmer Vernooij
| Status: | Merged | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Approved by: | Jelmer Vernooij | ||||
| Approved revision: | no longer in the source branch. | ||||
| Merge reported by: | The Breezy Bot | ||||
| Merged at revision: | not available | ||||
| Proposed branch: | lp://staging/~jelmer/brz/revno-order | ||||
| Merge into: | lp://staging/brz/3.0 | ||||
| Diff against target: |
435 lines (+195/-20) 14 files modified
breezy/bzr/branch.py (+1/-1) breezy/bzr/remote.py (+23/-1) breezy/bzr/smart/repository.py (+12/-6) breezy/errors.py (+10/-0) breezy/git/revspec.py (+2/-1) breezy/log.py (+2/-2) breezy/repository.py (+2/-4) breezy/revisionspec.py (+5/-5) breezy/tests/per_branch/__init__.py (+1/-0) breezy/tests/per_branch/test_get_rev_id.py (+40/-0) breezy/tests/per_repository/__init__.py (+1/-0) breezy/tests/per_repository/test_get_rev_id_for_revno.py (+61/-0) breezy/tests/test_remote.py (+31/-0) doc/en/release-notes/brz-3.0.txt (+4/-0) |
||||
| To merge this branch: | bzr merge lp://staging/~jelmer/brz/revno-order | ||||
| Related bugs: |
|
| Reviewer | Review Type | Date Requested | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Martin Packman | Approve | ||
|
Review via email:
|
|||
Commit message
Return consist errors from Branch.get_revid and Repository.
Description of the change
Return consist errors from Branch.get_revid and Repository.
Also, add a bunch of tests that were previously lacking for
Repository.
To post a comment you must log in.
Revision history for this message
| Martin Packman (gz) wrote | # |
Revision history for this message
| Jelmer Vernooij (jelmer) wrote | # |
Revision history for this message
| The Breezy Bot (the-breezy-bot) wrote | # |
Revision history for this message
| The Breezy Bot (the-breezy-bot) wrote | # |
Preview Diff
[H/L] Next/Prev Comment, [J/K] Next/Prev File, [N/P] Next/Prev Hunk
Looks good overall. See one question about reraising from smart inline. Also, not totally clear to me from the change, but presumably implicit, revno here is always enforced as a simple mainline rev?