GNU bug report logs - #39704
28.0.50; vc-print-branch-log data loss

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 39704 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 39704 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Juri Linkov <juri <at> linkov.net>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: 28.0.50; vc-print-branch-log data loss
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2020 01:32:35 +0200

Tags: patch

Accidentally I noticed that vc-print-branch-log prints a narrower log
than it should.  I don't remember any damage from this data loss
but this is not the right thing to do - by default it should show logs
from the repository root, not logs limited to a subdirectory when
this command happens to be called from a subdirectory.

Am I correct to expect that vc-print-branch-log should print
log from branch's root like vc-print-root-log does, and
not from a subdirectory like vc-print-log does?

diff --git a/lisp/vc/vc.el b/lisp/vc/vc.el
index f7d651fac6..13d60b6fcf 100644
--- a/lisp/vc/vc.el
+++ b/lisp/vc/vc.el
@@ -2559,9 +2590,11 @@ vc-print-branch-log
     (vc-read-revision "Branch to log: ")))
   (when (equal branch "")
     (error "No branch specified"))
-  (vc-print-log-internal (vc-responsible-backend default-directory)
-                         (list default-directory) branch t
-                         (when (> vc-log-show-limit 0) vc-log-show-limit)))
+  (let* ((backend (vc-responsible-backend default-directory))
+         (rootdir (vc-call-backend backend 'root default-directory)))
+    (vc-print-log-internal backend
+                           (list rootdir) branch t
+                           (when (> vc-log-show-limit 0) vc-log-show-limit))))
 
 ;;;###autoload
 (defun vc-log-incoming (&optional remote-location)

Message #8 received at 39704 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov <at> yandex.ru>
To: Juri Linkov <juri <at> linkov.net>, 39704 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Cc: Tom Tromey <tom <at> tromey.com>
Subject: Re: bug#39704: 28.0.50; vc-print-branch-log data loss
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2020 02:25:21 +0200

On 21.02.2020 1:32, Juri Linkov wrote:
> Tags: patch
> 
> Accidentally I noticed that vc-print-branch-log prints a narrower log
> than it should.  I don't remember any damage from this data loss
> but this is not the right thing to do - by default it should show logs
> from the repository root, not logs limited to a subdirectory when
> this command happens to be called from a subdirectory.
> 
> Am I correct to expect that vc-print-branch-log should print
> log from branch's root like vc-print-root-log does, and
> not from a subdirectory like vc-print-log does?

I think so (then, the patch LGTM).

Tom might want to weigh in on this, though.

Message #11 received at 39704 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Tom Tromey <tom <at> tromey.com>
To: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov <at> yandex.ru>
Cc: Tom Tromey <tom <at> tromey.com>, 39704 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Juri Linkov <juri <at> linkov.net>
Subject: Re: bug#39704: 28.0.50; vc-print-branch-log data loss
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2020 11:29:22 -0700

Dmitry> Tom might want to weigh in on this, though.

I don't really have an opinion.
The proposed behavior seems fine to me.

Tom

Message #14 received at 39704 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Juri Linkov <juri <at> linkov.net>
To: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov <at> yandex.ru>
Cc: Tom Tromey <tom <at> tromey.com>, 39704 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#39704: 28.0.50; vc-print-branch-log data loss
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2020 02:07:10 +0200

>> Accidentally I noticed that vc-print-branch-log prints a narrower log
>> than it should.  I don't remember any damage from this data loss
>> but this is not the right thing to do - by default it should show logs
>> from the repository root, not logs limited to a subdirectory when
>> this command happens to be called from a subdirectory.
>> Am I correct to expect that vc-print-branch-log should print
>> log from branch's root like vc-print-root-log does, and
>> not from a subdirectory like vc-print-log does?
>
> I think so (then, the patch LGTM).

Or maybe retain the old behavior on using a prefix arg?

I.e. C-u M-x vc-print-branch-log could ask for a directory,
with the default on default-directory.

Message #17 received at 39704 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov <at> yandex.ru>
To: Juri Linkov <juri <at> linkov.net>
Cc: Tom Tromey <tom <at> tromey.com>, 39704 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#39704: 28.0.50; vc-print-branch-log data loss
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2020 10:57:19 +0200

On 23.02.2020 2:07, Juri Linkov wrote:
> Or maybe retain the old behavior on using a prefix arg?
> 
> I.e. C-u M-x vc-print-branch-log could ask for a directory,
> with the default on default-directory.

Personally, I don't remember needing something like that (or, in a 
once-a-decade occurrence, I can use the console). But if you find it 
useful, sure.

Message #20 received at 39704 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Juri Linkov <juri <at> linkov.net>
To: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov <at> yandex.ru>
Cc: Tom Tromey <tom <at> tromey.com>, 39704 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#39704: 28.0.50; vc-print-branch-log data loss
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 01:34:37 +0200

tags 39704 fixed
close 39704 28.0.50
quit

>> Or maybe retain the old behavior on using a prefix arg?
>> I.e. C-u M-x vc-print-branch-log could ask for a directory,
>> with the default on default-directory.
>
> Personally, I don't remember needing something like that (or, in
> a once-a-decade occurrence, I can use the console). But if you find it 
> useful, sure.

Ok, pushed to master, and closed.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.