Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] remote-bzr: couple of fixes

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:

> On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> The previous version had an indentation bug (did I mention I hate python?).
>>>
>>> A few fixes to be applied on top of the massive changes already queued. Nothing
>>> major.
>>
>> [2/2] may not matter much in the context of my tree (people would
>> use post 1.8.2 fast-export if they are using remote-bzr from 1.8.3
>> from my tree ;-),
>
> Maybe, but if even if they have the latest git, pushing a tag will
> fail miserably, and with the patch it would fail nicely :)
>
>> but [1/2] sounds like it is a good thing to have
>> in 1.8.3 (not "on top of that 'massive' series").
>>
>> Assuming the "otherwise some version of bzr might barf" problem is
>> that repo.generate_revision_history() in those versions may not
>> apply str() to its first parameter and the caller is expected to
>> pass a string there, or something?
>
> No, there's no change to repo.generate_revision_history(), because we
> already convert the elements of the array to strings, it's the other
> callers of Marks::to_rev() that see a change, namely code that pushes
> to a remote, I think.
>
> And BTW, they are already strings, but unicode strings, because they
> come from a json file, somehow bazaar doesn't like that, but it works
> fine in my machine without the patch. Shrugs.
>
> Also, the emacs developers seem to be fine with all these changes,
> there's only one patch pending that I need to cleanup.

So do you want to queue these on top of the "massive" in 'next', not
directly on 'master'?