Re: [Monotone-devel] revert --missing misbehaves in 0.26

[Derek Scherger]

Jack Lloyd wrote:
> Montone's revert --missing seems to base paths off the current
> directory, rather than the base directory of the workspace. I think
> most people seeing this would realize the problem and self-correct,
> but it is strange (drop --missing seems to do the right thing and work
> no matter what the cwd is). I suppose in some extremely contorted case
> this could cause Monotone to revert the wrong file, as well. Based on
> the documentation this behaviour seems unintentional, and performing
> revert --missing from a subdirectory of a workspace should revert all
> missing files in or below that subdir.

Three things come to mind:

1. I think that 'revert --missing' currently has different behaviour 
than  'drop --missing' and 'add --unknown' and I'm curious as to what 
people's expectations are. What 'revert --missing' does when it has a 
restriction (i.e. 'revert --missing path ...') is essentially to run 'ls 
missing path ...' and then revert the missing paths that match the 
restriction. The restriction applies to missing things. Conversely, 'add 
--unknown path ...' and 'drop --missing ...'  add or drop *all* missing 
paths in *addition* to those that match the restriction. So in revert's 
case, the --missing set is intersected with the restricted set. While in 
the add/drop cases the --missing set is unioned with the restricted set. 
I haven't checked but it would probably be good if someone can confirm 
this actually is the current behaviour. The question I have is, is this 
behaviour "correct" or perhaps intuitive?

2. All of the ls commands that list paths do so relative to the 
workspace root rather than the current directory. I'm not sure what the 
general expectation is here but it seems somewhat odd to me. If my 
workspace dir is W, and I'm in W/a/b/c and say 'ls foo' I see paths like 
a/b/c/1 a/b/c/2 etc. The wikie page 
http://venge.net/monotone/wiki/RelativePathnames makes me wonder if the 
ls commands really should list paths relative to the currrent directory.

3. The reason that revert --missing was screwing up in the case above 
was pretty much that it too was expecting paths to be relative to the 
current directory, rather than the workspace root. It's literally using 
the paths from ls missing.

Lots of fun UI issues still to work out! Any opinions on any of the above?

Cheers,
Derek