Hide the "Code for this series" UI in projects that are configured to use git

Bug #1580167 reported by Chris Coulson
24
This bug affects 5 people
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
Launchpad itself
Triaged
Low
Unassigned

Bug Description

I'm in the process of migrating https://launchpad.net/oxide from bzr to git. After moving the code for https://launchpad.net/oxide/crmaster already and removing the link from that series to the old bzr repository, the page is left with an unconfigured "Code for this series" UI that can't be configured to link to the new git branch.

It would be nice to hide this UI for projects that are configured to use git.

Colin Watson (cjwatson)
tags: added: confusing-ui git lp-code ui
Changed in launchpad:
status: New → Triaged
importance: Undecided → Low
Revision history for this message
Andrew Johnson (anj) wrote :

+1

Alternatively (better than just hiding the ugly wording on the series page): Support linking a series to a specific git branch in the repository that the project is configured to use.

Revision history for this message
Colin Watson (cjwatson) wrote :

This would be possible, though on the whole we'd prefer to avoid getting series involved in git hosting. It's a lot of complexity that mostly isn't needed, and it brings its own problems: for example, git branches are more freely deletable than bzr branches are (it's just a "git push --delete" rather than a webapp operation) and so it would raise questions such as what happens if the nominated branch for a series is deleted. Best to avoid that if we don't need it.

Revision history for this message
Colin Watson (cjwatson) wrote :

Now that we have the machinery for per-branch ACLs, it's possible for the webapp to intervene when somebody tries to delete a branch. However, I still have some concerns about that approach: for example, if a project's default repository is an imported repository (which isn't uncommon, e.g. https://launchpad.net/grub), and a series is linked to a branch which is deleted on the remote side, what can we do? We shouldn't fail the import, but it would also be bad for the import to contain a silently-orphaned branch which now cannot be deleted despite not existing on the remote.

I think it would probably be better to have soft links in the same sort of way that we do for merge proposals. We'd check that the branch exists when creating the link, but there'd be nothing to stop it being deleted later, and the UI would only render it as a link if the branch exists. This isn't completely ideal, but I can't think of a better alternative.

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.