hg as a bugzilla?

[Michael Diamond]

On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 9:20 PM, Arne Babenhauserheide <arne_bab at web.de>wrote:

>
> If it’s possible, I think it would be nice to have this discussion on-list.
> I’m a happy user of b, and I think it would be great to be able to follow
> your
> discussion.
>
> That's a fair point, the conversation probably could have been carried out
on-list.  Perhaps it would be reasonable to say if you have a feature
request of the form "I would like X functionality" to contact me off-list,
whereas if your request / patch is more along the lines of "b would be a
better tool if X were possible" on-list discussion is appropriate.


To summarize my discussion with Ryan, he wants to be able to launch the
details editor from a script without needing to know the issue prefix.  A
prefix is output by `hg b add`, but it's not machine-parseable without some
string manipulation.  My first suggestion was a simple shell script,
something like:

#!/bin/bash
prefix = `hg b add $*`
hg b edit ${prefix:10:10}

Not the most robust solution, but it should work.  The better alternative,
which I will try to implement soonish, would be a -e flag for the add
command, which launches the editor for the newly created issue.

In addition, I think it would be nice to add a config (or CLI) parameter to
create the default empty details file automatically when the issue is
logged.  As noted in the readme, b functions correctly regardless of if a
details file exists, but I think some larger use cases would want the file
to always exist, and have it be tracked right away when the issue is
created.

Michael
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial/attachments/20111216/57a011c9/attachment.html>