sup talk - Mar 2009 - [PATCH] Allow multi_edit_labels to remove labels using -lab (the "; l" key binding)

Resent..

---
 lib/sup/modes/thread-index-mode.rb |   19 ++++++++++++++-----
 1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/sup/modes/thread-index-mode.rb
b/lib/sup/modes/thread-index-mode.rb
index 3dd0498..bde61cf 100644
--- a/lib/sup/modes/thread-index-mode.rb
+++ b/lib/sup/modes/thread-index-mode.rb
@@ -448,13 +448,22 @@ EOS
   end
 
   def multi_edit_labels threads
-    user_labels = BufferManager.ask_for_labels :add_labels, "Add labels:
", [], @hidden_labels
+    user_labels = BufferManager.ask_for_labels :labels, "Add/remove labels
(use -label to remove): ", [], @hidden_labels
     return unless user_labels
-    
-    hl = user_labels.select { |l| @hidden_labels.member? l }
+
+    user_labels.map! { |l| (l.to_s =~ /^-/)? [l.to_s.gsub(/^-?/,
'''').to_sym, true] : [l, false] }
+    hl = user_labels.select { |(l,_)| @hidden_labels.member? l }
     if hl.empty?
-      threads.each { |t| user_labels.each { |l| t.apply_label l } }
-      user_labels.each { |l| LabelManager << l }
+      threads.each do |t|
+        user_labels.each do |(l, to_remove)|
+          if to_remove
+            t.remove_label l
+          else
+            t.apply_label l
+          end
+        end
+      end
+      user_labels.each { |(l,_)| LabelManager << l }
     else
       BufferManager.flash "''#{hl}'' is a reserved
label!"
     end

-- 
Nicolas Pouillard

This patch conflict with the undo feature, I''ve locally resolved the
merge.
However I don''t really know what the best way to share the conflict
resolution.

Excerpts from Nicolas Pouillard''s message of Mon Mar 16 19:35:43 +0100
2009:
> Resent..
> 
> ---
>  lib/sup/modes/thread-index-mode.rb |   19 ++++++++++++++-----
>  1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/sup/modes/thread-index-mode.rb
b/lib/sup/modes/thread-index-mode.rb
> index 3dd0498..bde61cf 100644
> --- a/lib/sup/modes/thread-index-mode.rb
> +++ b/lib/sup/modes/thread-index-mode.rb
> @@ -448,13 +448,22 @@ EOS
>    end
>  
>    def multi_edit_labels threads
> -    user_labels = BufferManager.ask_for_labels :add_labels, "Add
labels: ", [], @hidden_labels
> +    user_labels = BufferManager.ask_for_labels :labels, "Add/remove
labels (use -label to remove): ", [], @hidden_labels
>      return unless user_labels
> -    
> -    hl = user_labels.select { |l| @hidden_labels.member? l }
> +
> +    user_labels.map! { |l| (l.to_s =~ /^-/)? [l.to_s.gsub(/^-?/,
'''').to_sym, true] : [l, false] }
> +    hl = user_labels.select { |(l,_)| @hidden_labels.member? l }
>      if hl.empty?
> -      threads.each { |t| user_labels.each { |l| t.apply_label l } }
> -      user_labels.each { |l| LabelManager << l }
> +      threads.each do |t|
> +        user_labels.each do |(l, to_remove)|
> +          if to_remove
> +            t.remove_label l
> +          else
> +            t.apply_label l
> +          end
> +        end
> +      end
> +      user_labels.each { |(l,_)| LabelManager << l }
>      else
>        BufferManager.flash "''#{hl}'' is a reserved
label!"
>      end
> 
-- 
Nicolas Pouillard

Reformatted excerpts from nicolas.pouillard''s message of
2009-03-18:
> This patch conflict with the undo feature, I''ve locally resolved
the
> merge. However I don''t really know what the best way to share the
> conflict resolution.
That''s a good question. For some reason git format-patch
doesn''t produce
anything for merge commits, even if they contain conflict resolution
changes. Maybe it''s for a good reason; I don''t know.

But you can use git diff. After merging and resolving the conflict, if
you do "git diff HEAD^", that should output the conflict-resolution
changes. You can send that to me and I can use it to replicate the
commit.
-- 
William <wmorgan-sup at masanjin.net>

Excerpts from William Morgan''s message of Sun Mar 22 22:21:46 +0100
2009:
> Reformatted excerpts from nicolas.pouillard''s message of
2009-03-18:
> > This patch conflict with the undo feature, I''ve locally
resolved the
> > merge. However I don''t really know what the best way to share
the
> > conflict resolution.
> 
> That''s a good question. For some reason git format-patch
doesn''t produce
> anything for merge commits, even if they contain conflict resolution
> changes. Maybe it''s for a good reason; I don''t know.
> 
> But you can use git diff. After merging and resolving the conflict, if
> you do "git diff HEAD^", that should output the
conflict-resolution
> changes. You can send that to me and I can use it to replicate the
> commit.
I''ve applied the resolution in a local branch, a attach to patches.
The first is done with ''git diff'' before commit the conflict
resolution.
The second is done with ''git diff HEAD^'' just after.

-- 
Nicolas Pouillard
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: undo+multi_edit_labels+remove.patch
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 1901 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/sup-talk/attachments/20090323/aa8a4b3b/attachment.obj>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: undo+multi_edit_labels+remove2.patch
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 1861 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/sup-talk/attachments/20090323/aa8a4b3b/attachment-0001.obj>

Reformatted excerpts from nicolas.pouillard''s message of
2009-03-23:
> I''ve applied the resolution in a local branch, a attach to
patches.
> The first is done with ''git diff'' before commit the
conflict resolution.
> The second is done with ''git diff HEAD^'' just after.
Only the second patch was really necessary. But thanks, it worked!

I''ve applied this patch on a branch called multi-remove-labels and
it''s
been merged into next.
-- 
William <wmorgan-sup at masanjin.net>

Excerpts from William Morgan''s message of Mon Mar 23 15:49:13 +0100
2009:
> Reformatted excerpts from nicolas.pouillard''s message of
2009-03-23:
> > I''ve applied the resolution in a local branch, a attach to
patches.
> > The first is done with ''git diff'' before commit the
conflict resolution.
> > The second is done with ''git diff HEAD^'' just after.
> 
> Only the second patch was really necessary. But thanks, it worked!
> 
> I''ve applied this patch on a branch called multi-remove-labels and
it''s
> been merged into next.
Great

-- 
Nicolas Pouillard