[py-dev] py.path svn status() does not support R
Hi there, In wccommand.py there is a status() method with support for retrieving the status of files in SVN. At some point there's an else branch that I'm now hitting: else: raise NotImplementedError("received flag %r" % % c0) My svn working copy contains files with status 'R'. What does this mean? Item has been replaced in your working copy. This means the file was scheduled for deletion, and then a new file with the same name was scheduled for addition in its place It would be nice if py.path had support for this case instead of bailing out with a NotImplementedError. Regards, Martijn
Hi Martijn, Martijn Faassen wrote:
In wccommand.py there is a status() method with support for retrieving the status of files in SVN.
At some point there's an else branch that I'm now hitting:
else: raise NotImplementedError("received flag %r" % % c0)
My svn working copy contains files with status 'R'. What does this mean?
Item has been replaced in your working copy. This means the file was scheduled for deletion, and then a new file with the same name was scheduled for addition in its place
It would be nice if py.path had support for this case instead of bailing out with a NotImplementedError.
I implemented this in revision 48347. I guess you could have done it yourself in the time you wrote this mail – it was completely trivial :-). Cheers, Carl Friedrich
Carl Friedrich Bolz wrote: [snip]
It would be nice if py.path had support for this case instead of bailing out with a NotImplementedError.
I implemented this in revision 48347. I guess you could have done it yourself in the time you wrote this mail – it was completely trivial :-).
Thanks! I didn't have a development copy set up at all, so it'd taken a bit more time than that. I'm using a release as just one more egg that's coming in. No tests to write either? Regards, Martijn
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Carl Friedrich Bolz wrote: [snip]
It would be nice if py.path had support for this case instead of bailing out with a NotImplementedError. I implemented this in revision 48347. I guess you could have done it yourself in the time you wrote this mail – it was completely trivial :-).
Thanks!
I didn't have a development copy set up at all, so it'd taken a bit more time than that. I'm using a release as just one more egg that's coming in. No tests to write either?
Of course a test. Test: 12 lines, actual fix: 3 lines. Just kidding, of course, it was a 5 min job for me, so I am not complaining. Cheers, Carl Friedrich
Hey, On Nov 7, 2007 5:47 PM, Carl Friedrich Bolz <cfbolz@gmx.de> wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote: [snip]
I didn't have a development copy set up at all, so it'd taken a bit more time than that. I'm using a release as just one more egg that's coming in. No tests to write either?
Of course a test. Test: 12 lines, actual fix: 3 lines. Just kidding, of course, it was a 5 min job for me, so I am not complaining.
Thanks again for the fix. It would've taken me a bit more time to figure out how to set everything up. Anyway, a good bug report is half the fix already. :) Regards, Martijn
participants (2)
-
Carl Friedrich Bolz -
Martijn Faassen