Re: b4 tui: Old serieses not removed

[Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2300 bytes --]

On Mon, Apr 27, 2026 at 11:33:48AM -0400, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2026 at 04:56:52AM +0900, Mark Brown wrote:

> > As part of an effort to sync review state between machines I have
> > arranged for the set of b4/review branches on the destination machine to
> > be the same as it was on the source.

> So, let's call these "machineA" and "machineB". You do most work on machineA,
> but machineB runs a periodic git fetch to get all the review branches from
> machineA, correct?

The use case is more that I have machines that I switch between - mostly
I'll just work on one machine, but sometimes I'll move that to a
different machine and use that for a period before switching in the
opposite direction.  The sync is done by mirroring the current state of
the active machine to a git server, then syncing the set of b4/review
branches with that on the machine that's picking things up.  It's more
than just fetches, I've also started clearing out old branches that were
archived.

> > When I open b4 tui and run 'U' to
> > update all branches it reports the existance of several hundred more
> > branches, looking at them going past and what's in the UI I think most
> > but not all of them are thanked branches which I later archived on the
> > source machine, the branches are gone but they remain in the UI.

> This is the part that's confusing to me, so I need clarification. I assume the
> following happened:

> - These series were reviewed on machineA (creating b4/review/* branches for
>   them).
> - MachineB runs periodic fetches from machineA, which creates these
>   b4/review/* branches on machineB.
> - The seriews are applied, thanked, and archived on machineA
> - When you open "b4 review tui" on machineB, these branches come back to life
>   as still being reviewed

IIRC they were actually listed as thanked, some of them would've been
synced prior to actually being archived (since that's a fiddly manual
process).

> Is this the correct description of your workflow? If so, are you running the
> sync script with --prune, so that archived branches are properly removed on
> machineB to match machineA?

Yes, the branches are being pruned (not with git prune).  I can't see
any local record of them and when I deleted the b4 review database they
were gone.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]