savannah-hackers-public
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Savannah-hackers-public] Re: log_accum at Savannah


From: Sylvain Beucler
Subject: [Savannah-hackers-public] Re: log_accum at Savannah
Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 17:17:17 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060403

The diff...

On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 05:14:33PM +0200, Sylvain Beucler wrote:
> On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 10:55:19AM -0400, Derek R. Price wrote:
> > Sylvain Beucler wrote:
> > > I am eventually working on merging our versions of log_accum and
> > > commit_prep with the ones at
> > > http://cvs.sv.gnu.org/viewcvs/ccvs/contrib/?root=cvs
> > > 
> > > After some work to support our features, it occurs to me that the
> > > contrib/ scripts as-are cannot work. At least,
> > 
> > I think it should be able to.  It's possible that I ported a recent
> > feature or two without testing thoroughly, but it worked not very long
> > ago and I will be happy to help solve any remaining problems.
> > 
> > > - the code for the new CVS loginfo options pattern (%{sVv} instead of
> > >   %1{sVv}) does not support getting the current directory as the first
> > >   non-option argument - so log_accum never think it worked on the last
> > >   directory given by commit_prep, and never send mail.
> > 
> > This is not true.  The current directory is now available to all trigger
> > hooks via via the "%p" format string (reference:
> > <http://ximbiot.com/cvs/manual/cvs-1.12.13/cvs_18.html#SEC185>).  The
> > documentation simply moved to the common page about the trigger scripts
> > since %p is now one of the standard format strings interpreted by all
> > the trigger hooks.
> 
> Sorry, I mean: log_accum, when $UseNewInfoFmtStrings = 1, assumed that
> only %{sVv} was passed, and thus could not know what the current
> directory was. I modified it to assume that %p %{sVv} is passed.
> 
> > > I've pretty much fixed those, but I wonder whether there is a point on
> > > working in your versions of log_accum/commit_prep if they are
> > > broken. Or maybe I totally missed something :)
> > 
> > I don't think it is broken, at least not badly.  If you wouldn't mind
> > sending me the patch you've already come up with, I'll be happy to apply
> > it and work out any other bugs I can find on this end before bouncing it
> > back to you.
> 
> I attach a diff of my current versions. I'm still working on them though.

-- 
Sylvain

Attachment: accum.diff
Description: Text document


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]