CODETOOLS-7900327: Change webrev to use 'trees' instead of 'forest'

[roger riggs]

Hi Daniel,

What error messages are generated if the tree extension is not configured?
Should there be something in the usage to advise the correct preconditions?

Roger

On 3/17/2014 5:38 AM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to propose a patch for fixing
>
> CODETOOLS-7900327: Change webrev to use 'trees' instead of 'forest'
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/CODETOOLS-7900327
>
> webrev: 
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dfuchs/webrev_CODETOOLS-7900327/webrev.00/
>
> (I will need a sponsor)
>
> This patch changes the behavior of the '-f' option, so that it relies
> on 'trees' [1] instead of 'forest'.
> For this to work your forest needs to have been configured for trees.
> This happens automatically if you used 'hg tclone' to clone it,
> but otherwise you can call 'hg tconfig --set --walk --depth' to
> configure it (you can use 'hg tlist' to see the list of trees
> that have been configured).
>
> The main changes in the patch (trickiest) comes from the
> fact that whereas hg f<cmd> used to print '[<relative-path>]'
> hg t<cmd> now prints '[<full-path>]:'
>
>
> I tested the patch with the following options:
>
> [all files edited, no commit]:
>
> webrev -fN
>
> [all files committed, no edits]:
>
> webrev -f
>
> best regards,
>
> -- daniel
> [1] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/code-tools/trees/
>
>> Hi Daniel;
>>
>> Since it looks like several people have tried your patch and seem to 
>> find it works for them then perhaps you should just create a 
>> CODETOOLS issue and propose it to this list (webrev-dev) for 
>> sponsorship.
>>
>> I haven't had a chance to try it yet but likely wouldn't have 
>> anything to add by my review (and I am not a committer/reviewer on 
>> CODETOOLS) so I would encourage you to go ahead with proposing it 
>> yourself.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Mike
>
>
>