Re: [Monotone-devel] [PATCH]automatically add executable files to .mt-attr on add

[Nathaniel Smith]

On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 09:43:10PM -0400, Joel Reed wrote:
> The attached patch automatically adds executable files to .mt-attr on 
> the "monotone add" command.
> 
> Other than the formatting of the braces (could someone tell me 
> the gnu ident command to match monotone's style?) is the patch ok?

"indent", I assume you mean :-) Just the default should be correct for
brace placement at least...

> If applied, I'll hack out a matching automatically delete "execute"
> entries in .mt-attr on "monotone drop" if people think that its a
> reasonable counterpart to the add functionality.

Almost -- instead of making it specific to "execute", we should
automatically delete all entries in .mt-attr on "monotone drop", and
should move entries in .mt-attr on "monotone rename".  Right?

> diff -up -ur monotone-0.18-orig/platform.hh monotone-0.18/platform.hh
[...]

I like this patch's functionality, but would suggest a slightly
different implementation: define is_executable as now, but instead of
hard-coding a call to it into add, expose is_executable to LUA (just
as we expose make_executable now). Then, add a new LUA hook, called by
add, that is given the path of a file being added, and gets to return
a table of attributes that should be set on the newly defined file.
Then make the default implementation of this hook be something like

  function initial_attrs(filename)
    if (is_executable(filename)) then
      return {execute = "true"}
    end
    return {}
  end

Actually, perhaps it would be better to have a table, like the current
attr_functions table, but each entry containing an initializer for the
given attribute.  So one would have:

  function attr_initializers["execute"] =
    function(filename)
      if (is_executable(filename)) then
        return "true"
      else
        return nil
      end
    end
  end

This would make it easier for people to add their own without
interfering with the pre-defined one(s), plus just be more consistent
with attr_functions...

This is a bit more code/docs/testing, but I think it's worth it?
Obviously #monotone is a good place to check if any parts of what
would be required are unclear...

-- Nathaniel

-- 
"...All of this suggests that if we wished to find a modern-day model
for British and American speech of the late eighteenth century, we could
probably do no better than Yosemite Sam."

This email may be read aloud.