History should be preserved across renaming

Issue #249 resolved
xiaq
created an issue

Item history (as shown in the +history view) is lost when a rename happens, since +history uses item name rather than item id to search historical revisions. Also, when I have two items a and b and somehow I get them renamed to each other, the resulting history is confusing.

Worse, when I hit "destroy" (+destroy view) I'm destroying items with the itemid rather than itemname. This is inconsistent and even harmful.

Comments (6)

  1. Thomas Waldmann repo owner

    well, nothing is lost, it just does not show it. as the view as it is implemented now is asking for history BY NAME, this is correct behaviour.

    but I agree that we maybe rather should query BY ITEMID.

    not sure if we need to offer BOTH.

    about destroy: this is not a bug, just, as you noticed, a inconsistency to history's current mode of operation.

    as a general note: in namespace branch, we can have multiple (or none) names per revision, so working by name might even get more problematic.

    maybe this bug report should be rewritten to be about consistency.

  2. Log in to comment