[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Monotone-devel] Thoughts about 'testresult'...
From: |
Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker |
Subject: |
Re: [Monotone-devel] Thoughts about 'testresult'... |
Date: |
Thu, 21 Apr 2005 17:10:10 +0200 (CEST) |
In message <address@hidden> on 21 Apr 2005 07:49:11 -0700, Emile Snyder
<address@hidden> said:
esnyder> On Thu, 2005-04-21 at 00:55, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
esnyder> ...snip...
esnyder> > I'm proposing to change that behavior by making things more
esnyder> > explicit. Instead of getting implicitely stuck on
esnyder> > revisions with true testresult certs, there should be a way
esnyder> > to explicitely ask to get only those. As fat as I can
esnyder> > tell, the simplest way would be with another selector.
esnyder> > Since we're talking about results, I propose 'r', with the
esnyder> > following format:
esnyder> >
esnyder> > r:keyid
esnyder>
esnyder> So, what commands would use this, and how would the final
esnyder> behavior differ?
'monotone update' and any other command that can use selectors.
Basically, it would search for the latest occurance of a true
testresult cert signed by keyid. It's a little like searching for a
tag, just a different cert...
Basically, the real difference is to make certain things more visible
and explicit, especially when the default checks in std_hooks.lua
makes for unexpected behavior depending on luck :-).
esnyder> Does update now never update you to a rev with a true
esnyder> testcert *unless* you give it this selector? That seems
esnyder> counter-intuitive in the other direction.
Why? Basically, whoever wants to go for revisions where I confirm
that 'make check' works for me would simply do this:
monotone update r:address@hidden
Nothing stops you from getting that revision anyway if that happens to
be the (single) head, AND it wouldn't get us into the surprising
effect we had a few days ago.
An advantage is also that you get to ask for specific tests (specific
keyids) instead of getting to trust anyone's test, more or less
randomly.
esnyder> > keyid would simply be the key with which the testresult
esnyder> > cert has been signed, since that key is supposed to
esnyder> > represent the test that has been successfully performed.
esnyder> >
esnyder> > Comments? Is this a completely wacky idea, or would people
esnyder> > like this (I would, most obviously)?
esnyder>
esnyder> r: makes me thing revision, is t: taken?
t is for tag. Otherwise, I'd agree with you.
Cheers,
Richard
-----
Please consider sponsoring my work on free software.
See http://www.free.lp.se/sponsoring.html for details.
--
Richard Levitte address@hidden
http://richard.levitte.org/
"When I became a man I put away childish things, including
the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up."
-- C.S. Lewis
- [Monotone-devel] Thoughts about 'testresult'..., Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker, 2005/04/21
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Thoughts about 'testresult'..., Emile Snyder, 2005/04/21
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Thoughts about 'testresult'...,
Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker <=
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Thoughts about 'testresult'..., Emile Snyder, 2005/04/21
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Thoughts about 'testresult'..., Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker, 2005/04/21
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Thoughts about 'testresult'..., Timothy Brownawell, 2005/04/21
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Thoughts about 'testresult'..., Sebastian Spaeth, 2005/04/21
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Thoughts about 'testresult'..., Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker, 2005/04/21
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Thoughts about 'testresult'..., Emile Snyder, 2005/04/21
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Thoughts about 'testresult'..., Nathaniel Smith, 2005/04/21
- [Monotone-devel] Re: Thoughts about 'testresult'..., Bruce Stephens, 2005/04/21
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Thoughts about 'testresult'..., Nathaniel Smith, 2005/04/21
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Thoughts about 'testresult'..., Nathaniel Smith, 2005/04/21