On 27/06/12 02:52, Didier Roche wrote:
Can we generate some kind of sha of the files (like previous
versions) and bail out (asking if the user want to proceed the
upgrade or block the command for now) if the file to overwrite
doesn't correspond to the blessed version?
For the first round, as we probably don't want to list all the file
sha checksum of files we supported in the past, we just ask telling
"those files are now considered considered as being owned by Quickly,
please be aware that we will upgrade them automatically for now on.
You changes are still saved and you can revert them to move your code
in other files in..."
What do you think? This will avoid making reverts on user code
without him being warned.
I've updated the branch to do a couple things to avoid losing user
code and making the user aware. Now it will print a note that it is
upgrading the code and will checkpoint the code before we touch
anything in bzr.
So again, here's the workflow for this branch:
0) User is a happy user of Quickly 12.04
1) User updates to Quickly 12.10
2) The first time the user runs quickly, they will see:
Note: This is the first time you have run Quickly since it has been
updated.
Quickly will now upgrade its files (bin/*, test_project_lib/*, and
setup.py).
But first it will save your project. View Quickly's changes by running:
bzr diff
3) User can revert any changes they don't like
Is this acceptable? Avoiding needing upgrade logic for every change
to Quickly-owned files makes us more nimble and less error prone.
https://code.launchpad.net/~mterry/quickly/overwrite/+merge/111315
<https://code.launchpad.net/%7Emterry/quickly/overwrite/+merge/111315>
