On 3/13/2016 4:24 AM, David Vines wrote:
On 11/03/2016 22:49, Ross Berteig wrote:
* technoteattachcli
New fossil attach command for CLI ability to attach files to wiki pages
and technotes. Work in progress, apparently stalled.
* technote-cli
New CLI features for managing technotes. Work in progress, apparently
stalled.
Looking more closely, it appears that the changes in technnote-cli got
made a second time in the branch technoteattach, which was integrated to
trunk by Richard right before you branched off technoteattachcli. Since
my survey was only of open branches, I missed that one.
I've haven't any comments back on these branches, but I'm happy with the
version of fossil I'm running with these branches (my implementation
certainly does the job I want to do), I haven't followed up. I don't
think a novice (with fossil) should be merging them in any event :). Any
thoughts as to my next actions?
IMHO, aside from checking if there's any part of the changes made in
technote-cli that got missed in the later branch, it likely should
simply be closed and abandoned.
That leaves technoteattachcli as the home of some further changes,
notably the new fossil attachment command to support attaching files to
wiki pages and technotes from the CLI. Which is certainly a useful feature.
Since there's been a fair bit of change on trunk since the first of the
year, the next step is to merge trunk into the your branch and resolve
any quirks and issues that creates. That will get you the latest round
of improvements to the test framework as well.
Since this step doesn't require particular knowledge of your new
features, I have done that merge, built it on Windows, and note that it
passes all the test cases that currently exist.
There's currently no test coverage at all of the old wiki command, and
certainly no coverage of the new --technote option or the attachment
command. I'd like to encourage new features to have at least a minimal
test case that exercises their basic functions. If I have time, I'll see
what I can do for that as well.
Aside from test cases, I guess we need consensus that the new fossil
attachment command is the right way to add the feature. It makes sense
to me. Anyone else want to chime in?
--
Ross Berteig r...@cheshireeng.com
Cheshire Engineering Corp. http://www.CheshireEng.com/
+1 626 303 1602
_______________________________________________
fossil-dev mailing list
fossil-dev@mailinglists.sqlite.org
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-dev
