[Bug 425510] Re: 'bzr mv' should do wildcard expansion on windows

[Maritza Mendez]

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 1:48 AM, Martin Pool <mbp at canonical.com> wrote:

> 2009/9/9 Maritza Mendez <martitzam at gmail.com>:
> >
> > I have made a one-line fix for this bug
> > (https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/425510) and a similar one-line fix for
> > https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/426410) in a private branch.  In each
> case
> > it is a simple matter of invoking Commnd._maybe_expand_globs() on the
> file
> > arguments although in the case of 'bzr mv' I am not sure I've thought
> enough
> > about clever side effects.  (Ultimately I decided not to protect the user
> > and just go ahead and expand blindly just like bash would.
>
> I think that's fine.
>
> Please, go ahead and push the branch to Launchpad, attach it to this
> bug, and propose to merge it, and we'll have a look.
>
> > So I went looking for some tests.  It appears to me that the blackbox
> tests
> > generally do not include tests for globbing, which I guess would explain
> how
> > these issues could exist.  Is there actually a policy of keeping the
> tests
> > "clean" of wildcards, or is this only an oversight?
>
> No, not at all, it's just an artifact of those tests being written
> before we'd considered that issue.
>
> > Second question: for two "simple" bugs of essentially the same type is it
> > necessary to submit two separate patches?
>
> No.
>
> > I'm not sure when I'll have time to write the tests and get patches,
> > especially since that will take longer than the fixes did!  So if anyone
> > wants to claim these fixes for themself, I'd be happy with that.
>
> Push what you have and at least it'll be visible and we'll see about
> adding the tests.
>
> >
> > Also, I am honestly not very comfortable with these ad hoc fixes for 'bzr
> > mv' and 'bzr rm'.  I did them because I need them now.  But it really
> seems
> > like the Right Thing To Do would be a high-level glob expansion which
> > applies a consistent policy for all input so that bzrlib would never have
> to
> > deal with platform-dependent shells and all new commands would
> automatically
> > work for all platforms.
>
> It does seem a bit ad hoc.  However, when we talked about it before,
> it did seem that the argument expansion needs to vary somewhat per
> command: if you say "bzr ignore *.obj" then you don't want the star
> expanded, and unlike on Unix there is no easy quoting mechanism.
> Though I suppose we could get the user to say "bzr ignore \*.obj", but
> that seems imperfect.
>
> Perhaps a better way to tackle this is for the declaration of the
> argument pattern taken by the command to declare which arguments will
> be subject to expansion?
>
> --
> Martin <http://launchpad.net/~mbp/ <http://launchpad.net/%7Embp/>>
>

Thank you, Martin.  I will see about pushing a branch to lp later tonight.
I'm a little embarrassed even talking about such a minor topic, so I
appreciate the interest.

You make a good point about 'bzr ignore \*.obj' not wanting globbing but I
wonder if that is more the exception than the rule.  Perhaps both a verbatim
and an expanded version of the command line would help each command pick
what it needs.  The point here is less about whether expansion is the right
thing to do and more about making sure that a consistent expansion is
availble to commands to use as needed.  So I think we can have the ebst of
both worlds, maybe.

~M




~M
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20090909/9ac4ce4d/attachment-0002.htm