Comment 2 for bug 516496

No, not dense - just a communication failure on my part. Nor is this a bug, but just a thought for a potential optimisation. Feel free to mark it back as invalid, but here's a second attempt to clarify.

So yes, the usual value for the revspec (for the base-branch) will be empty, the question for me is whether that would be best as an attribute on the SPR table, or on the SPRBuild table. Here's a scenario:

1. Joe navigates to his branch foo wanting to build the latest revision to his PPA. He and chooses "Build now".
2. A popup appears and he selects his PPA and clicks Build, selects his packaging branch, specifies the deb version etc., chooses the distroseries etc., names his recipe "foo_with_my_pkging". At the bottom of the overlay he sees an option to select a version of his branch, but he leaves it as Tip.

and everything is fine, until a few days/weeks later, he has a need to build a specific revision of his branch so:

3. Joe navigates back to his branch foo and clicks again on "Build now",
4. He selects his previous recipe "foo_with_my_pkging" (as from his point of view, why should I need a new recipe?)
5. He simply uses the version selector and changes it from Tip to rev 35 and clicks Build.

Now, currently this is not possible, because we store the base branch revision on the SPR record. At step 4., Joe would need to know that he actually needs to create a new recipe specifically for this revision, rather than a build of that recipe at a specific revision. But if instead (at least through the web interface), we *always* created recipes without a revision (ie. the recipe is *always* for tip), and stored a revision spec on the build, it would allow this flexibility.

Does that make sense, or am I talking total crap?