( )⚙ D7591 status: remove pointless filtering by alwaysmatcher in morestatus

This is an archive of the discontinued Mercurial Phabricator instance.

Differential D7591

status: remove pointless filtering by alwaysmatcher in morestatus
ClosedPublic

Authored by martinvonz on Dec 9 2019, 12:50 PM.

Details

Reviewers
pulkit
Group Reviewers
hg-reviewers
Commits
rHG072b745936f1: status: remove pointless filtering by alwaysmatcher in morestatus
Summary

The code has been like this since it was imported from FB's
hg-experimental repo. It has been like that even since it was added in
that repo. So I don't know why it looks that way. Perhaps the idea was
to one day filter the unresolved paths by any patterns provided by the
user. We can add a matcher back if we ever decide to do that.

Diff Detail

Repository
rHG Mercurial
Lint
Automatic diff as part of commit; lint not applicable.
Unit
Automatic diff as part of commit; unit tests not applicable.

Event Timeline

martinvonz created this revision.Dec 9 2019, 12:50 PM
rdamazio added a subscriber: rdamazio.Dec 10 2019, 12:33 AM

FYI I'm going to send a chain that rewrites a lot of this

martinvonz added a comment.Dec 10 2019, 12:39 AM
In D7591#111569, @rdamazio wrote:

FYI I'm going to send a chain that rewrites a lot of this

To be clear, are you telling reviewers not to queue this one because you will be rewriting the *patch* or you're saying that you will later be sending patches on top of this one?

rdamazio added a comment.Dec 10 2019, 12:56 AM
In D7591#111570, @martinvonz wrote:
In D7591#111569, @rdamazio wrote:

FYI I'm going to send a chain that rewrites a lot of this

To be clear, are you telling reviewers not to queue this one because you will be rewriting the *patch* or you're saying that you will later be sending patches on top of this one?

I'm writing a larger change which includes this change, I don't mind merging the conflict if you want to go ahead and queue this.

martinvonz added a comment.Dec 10 2019, 12:59 AM
In D7591#111571, @rdamazio wrote:
In D7591#111570, @martinvonz wrote:
In D7591#111569, @rdamazio wrote:

FYI I'm going to send a chain that rewrites a lot of this

To be clear, are you telling reviewers not to queue this one because you will be rewriting the *patch* or you're saying that you will later be sending patches on top of this one?

I'm writing a larger change which includes this change, I don't mind merging the conflict if you want to go ahead and queue this.

Okay, I think it makes sense to queue this one if it's just a subset of you changes.

pulkit accepted this revision.Dec 10 2019, 10:01 AM
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Dec 10 2019, 10:01 AM

Revision Contents
Changeset List

PathPackages
Mmercurial/cmdutil.py (5 lines)

Diff 18571

mercurial/cmdutil.py

return b'\n'.join(commentedlines) + b'\n' return b'\n'.join(commentedlines) + b'\n'
def _conflictsmsg(repo): def _conflictsmsg(repo):
mergestate = mergemod.mergestate.read(repo) mergestate = mergemod.mergestate.read(repo)
if not mergestate.active(): if not mergestate.active():
return return
m = scmutil.match(repo[None]) unresolvedlist = sorted(mergestate.unresolved())
unresolvedlist = [f for f in mergestate.unresolved() if m(f)]
if unresolvedlist: if unresolvedlist:
mergeliststr = b'\n'.join( mergeliststr = b'\n'.join(
[ [
b' %s' % util.pathto(repo.root, encoding.getcwd(), path) b' %s' % util.pathto(repo.root, encoding.getcwd(), path)
for path in sorted(unresolvedlist) for path in unresolvedlist
] ]
) )
msg = ( msg = (
_( _(
'''Unresolved merge conflicts: '''Unresolved merge conflicts:
%s %s