Review Request 121586: Restore upload functionality to git.reviewboard.kde.org

[René J.V. Bertin]

> On Dec. 22, 2014, 12:54 p.m., Nicolai Hähnle wrote:
> > vcs/vcsdiff.cpp, line 170
> > <https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121586/diff/4/?file=334874#file334874line170>
> >
> >     Unlike here, the copy constructor has not been updated to account for the new member variable.
> >     
> >     I recommend to change both operator= and the copy constructor to make use of the corresponding operations of VcsDiffPrivate. In other words: the copy operator should just be "... : d(new VcsDiffPrivate(rhs.d) {}", and the operator=:
> >     
> >         if (this != &rhs) {
> >             *d = *rhs.d;
> >         }
> >         return *this;
> 
> René J.V. Bertin wrote:
>     There is no VcsDiffPrivate(&VcsDiffPrivate) method, so rather than adding one I decided simply to do a `*d = *rhs.d` in the copy operator.
>     
>     This does beg a different question though: why do the copy and assign operators copy only the private data, and nothing of the other data? Does it make sense to have copy/assign operators like that?
> 
> Aleix Pol Gonzalez wrote:
>     All the data should be in the d-pointer (it's the whole point of it), if not something is wrong there as well.

I was under the impression that the d pointer held private data that complements and/or provides context to the data held by the other VcsDiff members; . And the operators we're discussing are not VcsDiffPrivate operators, but VcsDiff ones. Maybe `d` hold all that's needed to regenerate the other data in VcsDiff?


- René J.V.


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121586/#review72417
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Dec. 30, 2014, 9:07 p.m., René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121586/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Dec. 30, 2014, 9:07 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for KDE Software on Mac OS X and KDevelop.
> 
> 
> Repository: kdevplatform
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> A change was made on git.reviewboard.kde.org on December 13th a bit before 22h Europe/Paris time, ending support for p0 patch files. This broke the upload functionality in the current/stable version KDevelop's patchreview plugin.
> 
> The patch under review is a workaround (`*`) that restores this functionality by invoking the git helper process which generates the patchfiles with the correct arguments.
> 
> `*`) The real bug is in the reviewboard software, and should be addressed at that level. I work with a software distribution system that requires p0 patches, for which I created patches with KDevelop, something which will now require an additional step.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   plugins/git/gitplugin.h e930423 
>   plugins/git/gitplugin.cpp f38dc71 
>   plugins/patchreview/patchreview.cpp 18b63db 
>   plugins/reviewboard/reviewboardjobs.cpp 96cb354 
>   plugins/reviewboard/reviewboardplugin.cpp 1dd3bcb 
>   vcs/vcsdiff.h 573ec1b 
>   vcs/vcsdiff.cpp 01eb73c 
>   vcs/widgets/vcsdiffpatchsources.h 6a2f934 
>   vcs/widgets/vcsdiffpatchsources.cpp c3e2dae 
> 
> Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121586/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Under OS X 10.9; this RR has been created from a patched copy of KDevelop 4.7 .
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> René J.V. Bertin
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kdevelop-devel/attachments/20141231/0a72a482/attachment-0001.html>