Clippy is returning just under 300 warnings/errors for this project.

• Would you accept some changes which address those?
• Is there a CI pipeline for the project (with a linting stage)?

I would totally accept such changes, at least in pijul and pijul-macros. Lilbpijul is trickier, and still needs some work, before we can run clippy on it.

It doesn’t compile anymore.

• I agree with using .copied().

• Changing s.len() >= 1 + BLAKE3_BYTES loses the meaning of that comparison, and makes the code less readable (the 1 + constant is almost certainly optimised away by the compiler).

Edit: the other changes are good.

i just accidentally pushed this to main. i’m a little terrified that was possible!

I don’t think you did, it doesn’t appear in the changes: https://nest.pijul.com/pijul/pijul/changes.

Or if you did, this is a really bad bug, because permissions are supposed to be doubled-checked on the Nest for every single operation.

It doesn’t compile anymore.

the latest version isn’t compiling for me without these changes

i’m no longer able to push to this discussion (insufficient permissions)

Indeed, sorry about that. I got scared when you said you could push to main, and now I’m confused: can you really push to main and see your changes there?

i did not push to main.

1. I accidentally attempted to push to main from the command line, which ‘succeeded’ without error
2. I immediately checked the ‘changes’ on main and saw my profile picture at the top
3. panic

in actual fact it must have been a completely legitimately merged change at the top of that list ;)

i take it you’ve locked me out entirely as a precaution?

still just scratching the surface ;)

is there an equivalent of a git merge --squash workflow to squash a channel into a single change? if that’s not desirable, how would one handle this workflow using pijul?

ie. the changes are individually small, and it’s handy to review them separately. They also represent chipping away gradually at a larger problem. But in terms of merging them, they are closely related and represent a single ‘idea’

There isn’t really any convenient way to squash yet, hopefully we’ll get one soon. There are many possible ways to implement this, the most naive one being unrecording and recording again. Actually, that shouldn’t be very hard to do. One only needs to:

• record the pending change (like in pull).
• unrecord the changes you want to squash (like in unrecord)
• record them again (same code as for recording the pending change)
• (optionally, add a step to ask the user about the draft, like in record)
• apply.
• unrecord the pending change.

We could do this in pijul record, or as a subcommand of pijul change.

what would be your preference? I don’t want to mess up your nice neat repo history

The problem is not so much the repo history as the dependencies. I actually have little experience with Pijul (nobody has), so I don’t know the consequences of having lots of dependencies, rather than a large one. I’ll try to implement a squash today.

I know it looks like this is stalled, but I am reviewing these changes. I hope to be able to push them to main by tomorrow.

Done, thanks again! Good job. I’ve had to solve a few conflicts, but it’s done.

having issues pushing changes to this discussion. is this because it’s ‘closed’?

being asked for a password

This is strange, nothing changed. You should be able to push to closed discussions. This could be related to a new version of Pijul. I did publish (and yank) a version that had SSH issues, maybe you’re on that one?

Hi pmeunier, i’m still seeing this issue with alpha.31. Any time i try to push or pull using SSH I am asked for a password (which I don’t have!)

Is there a way I can get some more debug output? Are there any restrictions on the types of SSH keys (especially if that’s changed recently!)?

• i managed to be able to push and pull using SSH. I had to delete and re-add my public ssh key (the same one). Seems to work now

• when pushing the changes to this channel a whole bunch of changes were included.

• if i removed these changes and saved the document it would just regenerate. I was stuck in a loop where the only solutions were to a. delete everything and not push any changes b. push everything, including all the changes that aren’t mine

  anything else was just an infinite loop

• buried in this list of changes are two new changes

Am i perhaps doing this wrong? what i did was

1. clone a fresh copy of the repo
2. create a new channel
3. record 2 changes
4. push to this discussion

Alright, there’s been a datacentre fire and loads of changes since these patches. I believe these changes are fixed in the current version.

In an attempt to triage the remaining bugs before the beta release, I’ll close this discussion, but if you are still interested in helping with these lints, feel free to open a new one.