DJM-0 webrev problem
The frames output didn't come up for me it was blank, the sdiffs were
okay though and that is what I've used for this review.
DJM-1 131 set -- `hg root`
I think based on what happened with webrev this will cause error output
when this is run on a teamware workspace, right ?
DJM-2 125-145 + 194-202
This is all really just detecting the SCM_MODE. We have really similar
code in webrev as well now. We should probably put this code into a
common file that can be sourced in by both. Not needed for this
integration but something we should consider.
DJM-3 209-212
Why do we do the check for mercurial first ? previously and IIRC in
webrev we always check for teamware first. No big issue just wondering
why it is done this way around here.
DJM-4 256
I think having this named protodefs in .hg/ seems wrong, I think someone
else already suggested org.opensolaris.protodefs as an alternate name.
I like that name. Personally I've never manually populated this file so
I don't really know how people would use it.
DJM-5 318-319
default vs default-push/default-pull
I think default and default-pull are the most relevant here not
default-push. The way I think about this is that default/default-pull
would be from "the clone" and default-push is "the gate". Now I know we
won't need to have ON setup like that with Mercurial but I suspect that
default/default-pull in this case for many people will be a local to
them pure clone of ON and default-push would be an opensolaris.org (or
similar) hosted respository that is "remote".
So I'd say check default-pull then default. However if we do that here
we should probably look at webrev since it might need the same logic and
IIRC I didn't use default-pull anywhere.
I'm okay leaving the codejust looking at default, but remove the comment
and log a bug instead.
--
Darren J Moffat
_______________________________________________
tools-discuss mailing list
tools-discuss@opensolaris.org
