1004548 - brasstacks' bzcache repo is orphaned (remote repo on hg.mozilla.org/users/ has been deleted)

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Tree Management Graveyard :: OrangeFactor, defect)

Description

[Ed Morley [:emorley]]

[[e-mail]3 ~]$ cd ~/apps/orangefactor/src/bzcache/
[[e-mail]3 bzcache]$ hg pull
abort: HTTP Error 500: Internal Server Error
[[e-mail]3 bzcache]$ hg paths
default = http://hg.mozilla.org/users/jgriffin_mozilla.com/bzcache

In bug 988628 comment 7, jgriffin asked for his user repos to be deleted.

I've found:
https://github.com/jonallengriffin/bzcache

1) Is/was this the carnonical repo? (aka have we lost any recent commits to the hg repo)
2) We need to switch brasstacks to using the git repo instead.

Comment 1

[Jonathan Griffin (:jgriffin)]

bzcache was moved from my old user repo to https://github.com/jonallengriffin/bzcache when the request was made to delete mozilla user hg repos.  No commits have been lost.

Comment 2

[Jonathan Griffin (:jgriffin)]

Assign this to me if you want me to switch brasstacks to the new github location.

Comment 3

[Ed Morley [:emorley]]

[[e-mail]3 src]$ ls -al
total 20
drwxr-x--- 5 webtools webtools 4096 May 16 04:22 .
drwxr-x--- 6 webtools webtools 4096 Jan 30  2012 ..
drwxr-x--- 7 webtools webtools 4096 Feb 19 13:51 bzcache
drwxr-x--- 7 webtools webtools 4096 Jan 23  2012 mozautoeslib
drwxr-x--- 7 webtools webtools 4096 Feb  4 17:00 orangefactor

[[e-mail]3 src]$ mv bzcache bzcache-hg-old

[[e-mail]3 src]$ git clone https://github.com/jonallengriffin/bzcache.git bzcache
Initialized empty Git repository in /home/webtools/apps/orangefactor/src/bzcache/.git/
remote: Reusing existing pack: 137, done.
remote: Total 137 (delta 0), reused 0 (delta 0)
Receiving objects: 100% (137/137), 59.98 KiB, done.

[[e-mail]3 src]$ cd bzcache
[[e-mail]3 bzcache]$ python setup.py build
<snip>

[[e-mail]3 bzcache]$ python setup.py bdist
<snip>

[[e-mail]3 bzcache]$ cd ..
[[e-mail]3 src]$ diff -rw -x ".hg/*" -x ".git/*" -x "*.pyc" bzcache-hg-old bzcache
diff -rw -x '.hg/*' -x '.git/*' -x '*.pyc' bzcache-hg-old/build/lib/bzcache/bzcache.py bzcache/build/lib/bzcache/bzcache.py
85c85,92
<     data = self.eslib.query({ 'bugid': tuple(bugids) },
---
>
>     # request bugs from ES in groups of 250
>     chunk_size = 250
>     bug_chunks = [list(bugset)[i:i+chunk_size]
>                   for i in range(0, len(bugset), chunk_size)]
>
>     for bug_chunk in bug_chunks:
>       data = self.eslib.query({ 'bugid': tuple(bug_chunk) },
diff -rw -x '.hg/*' -x '.git/*' -x '*.pyc' bzcache-hg-old/bzcache/bz_cache_refresh.py bzcache/bzcache/bz_cache_refresh.py
18c18
<     #es.delete_index('bzcache')
---
>     es.delete_index('bzcache')
Only in bzcache-hg-old/bzcache: config.py.orig
Only in bzcache/dist: bzcache-0.1.0.linux-x86_64.tar.gz
Only in bzcache-hg-old/dist: bzcache-0.1.0-py2.6.egg
Only in bzcache: .git
Only in bzcache-hg-old: .hg

Comment 4

[Ed Morley [:emorley]]

The change in bzcache.py is due to bug 963311 and so expected - though bug 963311 comment 5 says deployed - Jonathan did it need deploying to multiple places? (Just curious for future reference).

The change in bz_cache_refresh.py is not expected, and was not present in the old hg repo either:
[[e-mail]3 bzcache-hg-old]$ hg st
M bzcache/bz_cache_refresh.py

This seems likely to be what is causing bug 1004513.

Comment 5

[Ed Morley [:emorley]]

[[e-mail]3 bzcache]$ git pull -v
From https://github.com/jonallengriffin/bzcache
 = [up to date]      master     -> origin/master
 = [up to date]      mastesr    -> origin/mastesr
Already up-to-date.

Comment 6

[Jonathan Griffin (:jgriffin)]

(In reply to Ed Morley [:edmorley UTC+0] from comment #4)
> The change in bzcache.py is due to bug 963311 and so expected - though bug
> 963311 comment 5 says deployed - Jonathan did it need deploying to multiple
> places? (Just curious for future reference).

No, just this one place.

> 
> The change in bz_cache_refresh.py is not expected, and was not present in
> the old hg repo either:
> [[e-mail]3 bzcache-hg-old]$ hg st
> M bzcache/bz_cache_refresh.py
> 
> This seems likely to be what is causing bug 1004513.

I don't recall why that was done...shame on me for not adding a comment!

Thanks for doing the switch.