Alexander Belchenko wrote:
> Because limbo and pending-deletion directories are both EMPTY -- I don't
> think bzr should blow up as it doing today. It can delete or reuse them.
> Today the check is VERY VERY hard: presence of any of this dirs even if
> they're empty -- and you get the problem.
>
> Why?
Because the directories shouldn't be there at all. If you kill shelve
after you've shelved some changes, then the directories will be present
and have contents. Being present and empty is just a special case of
them being present.
Special handling makes bzr's behaviour less predictable, and I don't
think it should be done for rare failure modes.
Aaron
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Alexander Belchenko wrote:
> Because limbo and pending-deletion directories are both EMPTY -- I don't
> think bzr should blow up as it doing today. It can delete or reuse them.
> Today the check is VERY VERY hard: presence of any of this dirs even if
> they're empty -- and you get the problem.
>
> Why?
Because the directories shouldn't be there at all. If you kill shelve
after you've shelved some changes, then the directories will be present
and have contents. Being present and empty is just a special case of
them being present.
Special handling makes bzr's behaviour less predictable, and I don't
think it should be done for rare failure modes.
Aaron enigmail. mozdev. org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://
iEYEARECAAYFAkr KSHAACgkQ0F+ nu1YWqI0vAQCfZJ D3oVDmlu7XF2hjr nLwNk/8 JoAVfftoMPvjoZC 7Ang
3loAn1XiQQ4R+
=U9p6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----