> > The test is any push/pull/sync operation using "mtn://server" instead of > > "server" (or "mtn://server:port/" instead of "server:port") as the ADDRESS > > parameter. > > I understood this; I was asking you to write an automated test that > could be added to the test suite, to ensure that it doesn't get broken > in the future.
I understood this. I was hoping that among experienced monotone hackers there might be some sympathy for the guy who sent in the fix, and someone might take the minute it took to commit the fix and throw in the five more minutes someone well-versed in the monotone tree would need to add the simple test case. But thanks for the invitation to spend all day trying to figure out the monotone test suite setup just to get any useful action on fixing something that should always have worked and that any random user walking up to use mtn can't fathom wouldn't be entirely reliable and thoroughly tested in any SCM that isn't a joke, it's awesome for building community spirit. I can't figure out why tests/netsync_mtn_uri_scheme doesn't get run already, or if it does, why it doesn't already fail the same way that I see when I try any simple manual use of a mtn:// uri. It's too bad if no one else cares to look into this. I think I'll spend what little time I can spare for improving monotone on trying to get a sensible packaged usher hosting server setup to work out of the box, rather than on this. Thanks, Roland _______________________________________________ Monotone-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
