Maybe fix #326

[jonashaag]

@rbeerster

[rbeerster]

Ok, that is a start. However, as I mentioned there are other attributes not defined. Using your change, here I what I came up with. Definitely look this over carefully. Just because it worked does not mean it is correct. Here is a diff:

diff -u /usr/local/lib/python3.9/site-packages/klaus/repo.py{.20240513,}
--- /usr/local/lib/python3.9/site-packages/klaus/repo.py.20240513	2024-05-13 19:35:41.427882686 -0400
+++ /usr/local/lib/python3.9/site-packages/klaus/repo.py	2024-05-13 20:00:06.162565145 -0400
@@ -58,6 +58,26 @@
     @property
     def path(self):
         return self.dulwich_repo.path
+    
+    @property
+    def object_store(self):
+        return self.dulwich_repo.object_store
+    
+    @property
+    def get_peeled(self):
+        return self.dulwich_repo.get_peeled
+    
+    @property
+    def refs(self):
+        return self.dulwich_repo.refs
+    
+    @property
+    def find_missing_objects(self):
+        return self.dulwich_repo.find_missing_objects
+    
+    @synchronized
+    def __getitem__(self, key):
+        return self.dulwich_repo[key]
 
     @property
     def name(self):
@@ -70,10 +90,6 @@
         else:
             return self.name
 
-    @synchronized
-    def __getitem__(self, key):
-        return self.dulwich_repo[key]
-
     # TODO: factor out stuff into dulwich
     @synchronized
     def get_last_updated_at(self):

[jonashaag]

Ok that's terrible, I'll have to proxy all of the attributes with a catch-all solution or maybe we can pass the inner actual repo object around instead of the wrapper.

[jonashaag]

I don't understand why this isn't covered in our tests though...