Re: dvc-add-log-entry vs dvc-partner-buffer

Stephen Leake <stephen_leake <at> stephe-leake.org> writes:

> So dvc-add-log-entry can't just call dvc-log-edit to reuse a buffer;
> it has to switch to it only.

Probably it's better to have dvc-log-edit itself reuse the buffer
without setting the partner buffer, so that both log-edit and
add-log-entry benefit of the fix.

>>> Ah. That is a different solution. I don't think it's viable; consider
>>> the case of two parallel workspaces, each controlled by different
>>> back-ends with different repositories. You always commit them at the
>>> same time, and review them in parallel, in two status buffers. Thus
>>> there are two status buffers with marked files, and two log-edit
>>> buffers; which does the commit choose?
>>
>> If the buffers are in sync, you don't care which one to chose.
>
> Since they are commiting to different repositories, it does make a
> difference. 
>
> Suppose the workspace for project A is ready to commit, but B still
> has some files to review. You are in the log-edit buffer for A, and
> hit C-c C-c. But dvc-log-edit-done chooses the log-edit buffer for
                                                 ^^^^^^^^
I suppose you mean "status" here.

> B, and it does the wrong thing.

Then, your point is not that you can choose the wrong buffer, but that