GNU bug report logs - #68579
[PATCH] Support a local repo as URL in treesit-language-source-alist

Previous Next

Full log

Message #20 received at 68579 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru>
Cc: casouri <at> gmail.com, 68579 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#68579: [PATCH] Support a local repo as URL in
 treesit-language-source-alist
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2024 17:06:15 +0200

> From: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru>
> Cc: casouri <at> gmail.com, 68579 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2024 17:33:03 +0300
> 
> > > > > -      (when (file-exists-p workdir)
> > > > > +      (when (and (not url-is-path) (file-exists-p workdir))
> > > > >          (delete-directory workdir t)))))
> > > > 
> > > > Why?  Does workdir have different semantics in these two use
> > > > cases?
> > > > Isn't it the directory where we cloned the repository?
> > > 
> > > When an absolute path is passed as URL, that means the user have
> > > cloned
> > > the repo, not us.
> > 
> > But you still clone from it into workdir, no?  treesit--git-clone-
> > repo
> > invokes "git clone" in both cases, according to my reading of the
> > patch.
> 
> No, the `treesit--git-clone-repo` is located on the "else" branch of
> the `(if url-is-path`. That is, we do not call it when it's a local
> path

Then this assumes some kind of workflow, doesn't it?  The user must
first clone the repository, either via treesit.el or manually, and
then they can use this new feature, right?  So I guess we should
document this workflow somewhere?

Previous Next

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