{"state":{"revisions":[{"id":"8872","callsign":"HG","title":"rhg: make output of `files` relative to the current directory and the root","author":"acezar","summary":"This matches the behavior of `hg files`.\nThe util is added in `hg-core` instead of `rhg` because this operation could\nbe useful for other external tools. (this was definitely not prompted by rust\nissue #50784, I swear)","testPlan":"","lineCount":"85","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["Alphare"],"ccs":["indygreg","Alphare","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"inline","comment":"It feels weird to me that this returns `[u8]` instead of an `HgPath[Buf]`. What's your justification for this?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"274","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hg-core\/src\/utils\/files.rs","diffId":"22255","author":"indygreg","id":"133409","dateCreated":"1596917979","dateModified":"1596917979"},{"type":"update","diffId":"22255","author":"acezar","id":"132730","dateCreated":"1596531546","dateModified":"1596531546"},{"type":"comment","comment":"To reviewers: this was my changeset, I'm not sure how authorship is attributed but I... accept the revision of course.","author":"Alphare","id":"132693","dateCreated":"1596468315","dateModified":"1596468315"},{"type":"accept","author":"Alphare","id":"132692","dateCreated":"1596468315","dateModified":"1596468315"},{"type":"update","diffId":"22237","author":"acezar","id":"132657","dateCreated":"1596464806","dateModified":"1596464806"}],"dateCreated":"1596464806","dateModified":"1596917979","status":"Needs Review"},{"id":"8623","callsign":"HG","title":"rebase: add a config knob for forcing in-memory rebasing","author":"durin42","summary":"Use it in a test case where we know the rebase should proceed without\nincident in-memory, so we can see tracebacks rather than\nfallbacks. This makes it easier to try and debug when things are\nbroken.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"13","dependsOn":["8572"],"reviewers":["martinvonz","indygreg"],"ccs":["marmoute","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"reject","author":"indygreg","id":"133396","dateCreated":"1596917119","dateModified":"1596917119"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21616","author":"durin42","id":"128893","dateCreated":"1591891684","dateModified":"1591891684"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This looks like a job for the `[devel]` config section. what about. `devel.rebase.in-memory=force` ?","author":"marmoute","id":"128833","dateCreated":"1591780653","dateModified":"1591780653"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21597","author":"durin42","id":"128798","dateCreated":"1591735932","dateModified":"1591735932"}],"dateCreated":"1591735932","dateModified":"1596917119","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8562","callsign":"HG","title":"shelve: get mergestate via context","author":"durin42","summary":"","testPlan":"","lineCount":"3","dependsOn":["8561"],"reviewers":["marmoute","indygreg"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"reject","author":"indygreg","id":"133394","dateCreated":"1596917097","dateModified":"1596917097"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"128616","dateCreated":"1591638911","dateModified":"1591638911"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21439","author":"durin42","id":"127820","dateCreated":"1589839681","dateModified":"1589839681"}],"dateCreated":"1589839681","dateModified":"1596917097","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8561","callsign":"HG","title":"hg: get mergestate via context","author":"durin42","summary":"","testPlan":"","lineCount":"3","dependsOn":["8560"],"reviewers":["marmoute","indygreg"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"reject","author":"indygreg","id":"133392","dateCreated":"1596917096","dateModified":"1596917096"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"128615","dateCreated":"1591638891","dateModified":"1591638891"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21438","author":"durin42","id":"127813","dateCreated":"1589839677","dateModified":"1589839677"}],"dateCreated":"1589839677","dateModified":"1596917096","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8560","callsign":"HG","title":"templatekw: get mergestate via context","author":"durin42","summary":"Happily, this resolves an import cycle!","testPlan":"","lineCount":"4","dependsOn":["8559"],"reviewers":["marmoute","indygreg"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"reject","author":"indygreg","id":"133390","dateCreated":"1596917096","dateModified":"1596917096"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"128614","dateCreated":"1591638883","dateModified":"1591638883"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21437","author":"durin42","id":"127805","dateCreated":"1589839673","dateModified":"1589839673"}],"dateCreated":"1589839673","dateModified":"1596917096","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8559","callsign":"HG","title":"revset: get mergestate via context","author":"durin42","summary":"Happily, this resolves an import cycle!","testPlan":"","lineCount":"10","dependsOn":["8558"],"reviewers":["marmoute","indygreg"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"reject","author":"indygreg","id":"133388","dateCreated":"1596917095","dateModified":"1596917095"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"128613","dateCreated":"1591638872","dateModified":"1591638872"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21436","author":"durin42","id":"127797","dateCreated":"1589839670","dateModified":"1589839670"}],"dateCreated":"1589839670","dateModified":"1596917095","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8558","callsign":"HG","title":"fileset: get mergestate via context","author":"durin42","summary":"Happily, this resolves an import cycle!","testPlan":"","lineCount":"5","dependsOn":["8557"],"reviewers":["marmoute","indygreg"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"reject","author":"indygreg","id":"133386","dateCreated":"1596917095","dateModified":"1596917095"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"128612","dateCreated":"1591638863","dateModified":"1591638863"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21435","author":"durin42","id":"127789","dateCreated":"1589839667","dateModified":"1589839667"}],"dateCreated":"1589839667","dateModified":"1596917095","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8557","callsign":"HG","title":"debugcommands: get mergestate via context","author":"durin42","summary":"","testPlan":"","lineCount":"2","dependsOn":["8556"],"reviewers":["marmoute","indygreg"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"reject","author":"indygreg","id":"133384","dateCreated":"1596917094","dateModified":"1596917094"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"128611","dateCreated":"1591638844","dateModified":"1591638844"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21543","author":"durin42","id":"128402","dateCreated":"1591026581","dateModified":"1591026581"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21434","author":"durin42","id":"127782","dateCreated":"1589839663","dateModified":"1589839663"}],"dateCreated":"1589839663","dateModified":"1596917094","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8556","callsign":"HG","title":"commands: get mergestate via context","author":"durin42","summary":"","testPlan":"","lineCount":"6","dependsOn":["8555"],"reviewers":["marmoute","indygreg"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"reject","author":"indygreg","id":"133382","dateCreated":"1596917094","dateModified":"1596917094"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21593","author":"durin42","id":"128792","dateCreated":"1591735866","dateModified":"1591735866"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"128610","dateCreated":"1591638838","dateModified":"1591638838"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21508","author":"durin42","id":"128248","dateCreated":"1590697567","dateModified":"1590697567"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21433","author":"durin42","id":"127775","dateCreated":"1589839660","dateModified":"1589839660"}],"dateCreated":"1589839660","dateModified":"1596917094","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8555","callsign":"HG","title":"cmdutil: get mergestate via context","author":"durin42","summary":"","testPlan":"","lineCount":"5","dependsOn":["8554"],"reviewers":["marmoute","indygreg"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"reject","author":"indygreg","id":"133380","dateCreated":"1596917094","dateModified":"1596917094"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"128609","dateCreated":"1591638831","dateModified":"1591638831"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21507","author":"durin42","id":"128247","dateCreated":"1590697562","dateModified":"1590697562"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21432","author":"durin42","id":"127768","dateCreated":"1589839656","dateModified":"1589839656"}],"dateCreated":"1589839656","dateModified":"1596917094","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8554","callsign":"HG","title":"strip: get mergestate via context","author":"durin42","summary":"","testPlan":"","lineCount":"3","dependsOn":["8553"],"reviewers":["marmoute","indygreg"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"reject","author":"indygreg","id":"133378","dateCreated":"1596917093","dateModified":"1596917093"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"128608","dateCreated":"1591638768","dateModified":"1591638768"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21431","author":"durin42","id":"127761","dateCreated":"1589839653","dateModified":"1589839653"}],"dateCreated":"1589839653","dateModified":"1596917093","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8553","callsign":"HG","title":"histedit: use context to load mergestate instead of loading it directly","author":"durin42","summary":"","testPlan":"","lineCount":"3","dependsOn":["8552"],"reviewers":["marmoute","indygreg"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"reject","author":"indygreg","id":"133376","dateCreated":"1596917093","dateModified":"1596917093"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"128607","dateCreated":"1591638759","dateModified":"1591638759"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21430","author":"durin42","id":"127754","dateCreated":"1589839650","dateModified":"1589839650"}],"dateCreated":"1589839650","dateModified":"1596917093","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8552","callsign":"HG","title":"fix: use context to fetch mergestate instead of loading it directly","author":"durin42","summary":"","testPlan":"","lineCount":"5","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["marmoute","indygreg"],"ccs":["indygreg","marmoute","martinvonz","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"reject","author":"indygreg","id":"133374","dateCreated":"1596917093","dateModified":"1596917093"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This is stalled. I've got some bugs in the logic I can't track down and\nthis is second on my priority list at work. I do intend to come back to it,\nbut it'd be fair to mark it all as changes requested.","author":"durin42","id":"133369","dateCreated":"1596916812","dateModified":"1596916812"},{"type":"comment","comment":"@durin42 what's the state of this series? Can the bottom part of it be reviewed or do you plan to revisit the entire series? Perhaps a rebase would be in order, just in case?","author":"indygreg","id":"133356","dateCreated":"1596913550","dateModified":"1596913550"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8552#128827, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>! In D8552#128826, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>>! In D8552#128780, @durin42 wrote:\n>>>>>! In D8552#128779, @durin42 wrote:\n>>>>>>! In D8552#128767, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>>>>>! In D8552#128629, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>>>>>>! In D8552#128621, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>>>>>>>! In D8552#128605, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>>>>>>@martinvonz can you clarify why mergestate on an `overlayworkingctx` would never make sense ?\n>>>>>>> \n>>>>>>> That makes sense. What I said does not make sense is to check for unresolved merge conflicts (before starting an operation).\n>>>>>> \n>>>>>> Checking for unresolved merge conflict on an `overlayworkingctx` does not make sense because the overlayctx is new and therefor will always be conflict free ?\n>>>>> \n>>>>> I view `overlayworkingctx` as something that exists for creating commits without touching the working copy and without caring about the working copy state. In the code here, we explicitly care about the working copy state (because we're going to modify it).\n>>>> \n>>>> Ah, interesting. That angle hadn't occurred to me. I don't think I'm wholly convinced, but maybe we need an explicit mechanism for \"get the wdir\" as contrasted with \"get a context for the wdir\".\n>>>> \n>>>> I think I'll at least remove this patch from the stack for now...\n>>> \n>>> Question @martinvonz : do you think overlayworkingctx should also not read the local mergestate, but instead should use an in-memory one? I'm not sure how you're envisioning the abstraction boundary there...\n>> \n>> Oh, definitely. That's also what you did in later patches, right?  It would seem like a bug to me if it read the local mergestate.\n> \n> +1\n\nI had to look at my own patches: overlayworkingctx uses the in-memory mergestate, workingctx uses the on-disk one. `repo[None]` returns a _workingctx_, not an overlay one, so I'm confused what the issue is here.","author":"durin42","id":"128881","dateCreated":"1591891482","dateModified":"1591891482"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8552#128826, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>! In D8552#128780, @durin42 wrote:\n>>>>! In D8552#128779, @durin42 wrote:\n>>>>>! In D8552#128767, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>>>>! In D8552#128629, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>>>>>! In D8552#128621, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>>>>>>! In D8552#128605, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>>>>>@martinvonz can you clarify why mergestate on an `overlayworkingctx` would never make sense ?\n>>>>>> \n>>>>>> That makes sense. What I said does not make sense is to check for unresolved merge conflicts (before starting an operation).\n>>>>> \n>>>>> Checking for unresolved merge conflict on an `overlayworkingctx` does not make sense because the overlayctx is new and therefor will always be conflict free ?\n>>>> \n>>>> I view `overlayworkingctx` as something that exists for creating commits without touching the working copy and without caring about the working copy state. In the code here, we explicitly care about the working copy state (because we're going to modify it).\n>>> \n>>> Ah, interesting. That angle hadn't occurred to me. I don't think I'm wholly convinced, but maybe we need an explicit mechanism for \"get the wdir\" as contrasted with \"get a context for the wdir\".\n>>> \n>>> I think I'll at least remove this patch from the stack for now...\n>> \n>> Question @martinvonz : do you think overlayworkingctx should also not read the local mergestate, but instead should use an in-memory one? I'm not sure how you're envisioning the abstraction boundary there...\n> \n> Oh, definitely. That's also what you did in later patches, right?  It would seem like a bug to me if it read the local mergestate.\n\n+1","author":"marmoute","id":"128827","dateCreated":"1591776142","dateModified":"1591776142"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8552#128780, @durin42 wrote:\n>>>! In D8552#128779, @durin42 wrote:\n>>>>! In D8552#128767, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>>>! In D8552#128629, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>>>>! In D8552#128621, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>>>>>! In D8552#128605, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>>>>@martinvonz can you clarify why mergestate on an `overlayworkingctx` would never make sense ?\n>>>>> \n>>>>> That makes sense. What I said does not make sense is to check for unresolved merge conflicts (before starting an operation).\n>>>> \n>>>> Checking for unresolved merge conflict on an `overlayworkingctx` does not make sense because the overlayctx is new and therefor will always be conflict free ?\n>>> \n>>> I view `overlayworkingctx` as something that exists for creating commits without touching the working copy and without caring about the working copy state. In the code here, we explicitly care about the working copy state (because we're going to modify it).\n>> \n>> Ah, interesting. That angle hadn't occurred to me. I don't think I'm wholly convinced, but maybe we need an explicit mechanism for \"get the wdir\" as contrasted with \"get a context for the wdir\".\n>> \n>> I think I'll at least remove this patch from the stack for now...\n> \n> Question @martinvonz : do you think overlayworkingctx should also not read the local mergestate, but instead should use an in-memory one? I'm not sure how you're envisioning the abstraction boundary there...\n\nOh, definitely. That's also what you did in later patches, right?  It would seem like a bug to me if it read the local mergestate.","author":"martinvonz","id":"128826","dateCreated":"1591738114","dateModified":"1591738114"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8552#128779, @durin42 wrote:\n>>>! In D8552#128767, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>>! In D8552#128629, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>>>! In D8552#128621, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>>>>! In D8552#128605, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>>>@martinvonz can you clarify why mergestate on an `overlayworkingctx` would never make sense ?\n>>>> \n>>>> That makes sense. What I said does not make sense is to check for unresolved merge conflicts (before starting an operation).\n>>> \n>>> Checking for unresolved merge conflict on an `overlayworkingctx` does not make sense because the overlayctx is new and therefor will always be conflict free ?\n>> \n>> I view `overlayworkingctx` as something that exists for creating commits without touching the working copy and without caring about the working copy state. In the code here, we explicitly care about the working copy state (because we're going to modify it).\n> \n> Ah, interesting. That angle hadn't occurred to me. I don't think I'm wholly convinced, but maybe we need an explicit mechanism for \"get the wdir\" as contrasted with \"get a context for the wdir\".\n> \n> I think I'll at least remove this patch from the stack for now...\n\nQuestion @martinvonz : do you think overlayworkingctx should also not read the local mergestate, but instead should use an in-memory one? I'm not sure how you're envisioning the abstraction boundary there...","author":"durin42","id":"128780","dateCreated":"1591735339","dateModified":"1591735339"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8552#128767, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>! In D8552#128629, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>>! In D8552#128621, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>>>! In D8552#128605, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>>@martinvonz can you clarify why mergestate on an `overlayworkingctx` would never make sense ?\n>>> \n>>> That makes sense. What I said does not make sense is to check for unresolved merge conflicts (before starting an operation).\n>> \n>> Checking for unresolved merge conflict on an `overlayworkingctx` does not make sense because the overlayctx is new and therefor will always be conflict free ?\n> \n> I view `overlayworkingctx` as something that exists for creating commits without touching the working copy and without caring about the working copy state. In the code here, we explicitly care about the working copy state (because we're going to modify it).\n\nAh, interesting. That angle hadn't occurred to me. I don't think I'm wholly convinced, but maybe we need an explicit mechanism for \"get the wdir\" as contrasted with \"get a context for the wdir\".\n\nI think I'll at least remove this patch from the stack for now...","author":"durin42","id":"128779","dateCreated":"1591735174","dateModified":"1591735174"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8552#128629, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>! In D8552#128621, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>>! In D8552#128605, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>@martinvonz can you clarify why mergestate on an `overlayworkingctx` would never make sense ?\n>> \n>> That makes sense. What I said does not make sense is to check for unresolved merge conflicts (before starting an operation).\n> \n> Checking for unresolved merge conflict on an `overlayworkingctx` does not make sense because the overlayctx is new and therefor will always be conflict free ?\n\nI view `overlayworkingctx` as something that exists for creating commits without touching the working copy and without caring about the working copy state. In the code here, we explicitly care about the working copy state (because we're going to modify it).","author":"martinvonz","id":"128767","dateCreated":"1591721012","dateModified":"1591721012"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8552#128621, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>! In D8552#128605, @marmoute wrote:\n>>@martinvonz can you clarify why mergestate on an `overlayworkingctx` would never make sense ?\n> \n> That makes sense. What I said does not make sense is to check for unresolved merge conflicts (before starting an operation).\n\nChecking for unresolved merge conflict on an `overlayworkingctx` does not make sense because the overlayctx is new and therefor will always be conflict free ?","author":"marmoute","id":"128629","dateCreated":"1591692022","dateModified":"1591692022"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8552#128605, @marmoute wrote:\n>@martinvonz can you clarify why mergestate on an `overlayworkingctx` would never make sense ?\n\nThat makes sense. What I said does not make sense is to check for unresolved merge conflicts (before starting an operation).","author":"martinvonz","id":"128621","dateCreated":"1591639223","dateModified":"1591639223"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"128606","dateCreated":"1591638750","dateModified":"1591638750"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I lean toward @durin42  here. Having one clear official way to do it in all case would be better. @martinvonz can you clarify why mergestate on an `overlayworkingctx` would never make sense ?","author":"marmoute","id":"128605","dateCreated":"1591638733","dateModified":"1591638733"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8552#127900, @durin42 wrote:\n>>>! In D8552#127895, @martinvonz wrote:\n>> I think I'd prefer to leave code that doesn't use `overlayworkingctx` unchanged. I don't see any reason to get the merge state from the context if we know that the context is a regular `workingctx`.\n> \n> I'd rather it was globally-consistent that if you need a mergestate, you load it via a context, so that more code will implicitly be right for in-memory operations.\n\nAs long as we do `repo[None].mergestate()` it will not be more or less right than before. We'd at least want to refactor the code so it creates a `wctx` instance early on and then reuse that as much as possible, so we could later replace the `wctx = repo[None]` by `wctx = overlayworkingctx(...)`. In cases like this one (checking for unresolved merge conflicts), it will never make sense to do that on an `overlayworkingctx`. I'm very much in favor of making more things work \"in memory\" where that's reasonable, but I'd prefer to leave callers unchanged until we actually try that in earnest. I think we have a similar situation with the dirstate and I don't think we've tried to hide all access to the dirstate bethind the context objects.","author":"martinvonz","id":"127920","dateCreated":"1589920781","dateModified":"1589920781"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8552#127895, @martinvonz wrote:\n> I think I'd prefer to leave code that doesn't use `overlayworkingctx` unchanged. I don't see any reason to get the merge state from the context if we know that the context is a regular `workingctx`.\n\nI'd rather it was globally-consistent that if you need a mergestate, you load it via a context, so that more code will implicitly be right for in-memory operations.","author":"durin42","id":"127900","dateCreated":"1589915851","dateModified":"1589915851"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I think I'd prefer to leave code that doesn't use `overlayworkingctx` unchanged. I don't see any reason to get the merge state from the context if we know that the context is a regular `workingctx`.","author":"martinvonz","id":"127895","dateCreated":"1589869407","dateModified":"1589869407"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21429","author":"durin42","id":"127747","dateCreated":"1589839647","dateModified":"1589839647"}],"dateCreated":"1589839647","dateModified":"1596917093","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8913","callsign":"HG","title":"scmutil: introduce filterrequirements() to split reqs into wc and store ones","author":"pulkit","summary":"In upcoming patches where we try to implement requirements in store, we will\nneed a mechanism to split all requirements on some basis and decide which one\ngoes to `.hg\/requires` and which one goes to `.hg\/store\/requires`.\n\nThis patch introduce a separate function for that. It does not do anything for\nnow but will be doing something soon.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"17","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["indygreg"],"ccs":["indygreg","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"I'm going to approve but will hold off landing until the following patch solidifies a bit.","author":"indygreg","id":"133335","dateCreated":"1596907063","dateModified":"1596907063"},{"type":"accept","author":"indygreg","id":"133334","dateCreated":"1596907063","dateModified":"1596907063"},{"type":"update","diffId":"22327","author":"pulkit","id":"133174","dateCreated":"1596804340","dateModified":"1596804340"}],"dateCreated":"1596804340","dateModified":"1596907063","status":"Accepted"},{"id":"8914","callsign":"HG","title":"helptext: document exp-sharesafe in internals\/requirements.txt","author":"pulkit","summary":"`exp-sharesafe` is a new requirement and we should document it.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"15","dependsOn":["8673"],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["marmoute","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"133205","dateCreated":"1596824211","dateModified":"1596824211"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This should not be documented as long as it experimental (and the behavior is not freezed). The documentation should come when we rename the requirement name to its final name.\n\nHowever it is good to have the documentation ready for that time :-) I think you should describe the config behavior with and without this option in more details. The \"requirement\" logic change is mostly \"we fixed it\", but the new behavior with 4 different files (`share\/.hg\/hgrc`, `share\/.hg\/nonsharedrc`, `source\/.hg\/hgrc` and `source\/.hg\/nonsharedrc`) probably need to be explicitly explained.","author":"marmoute","id":"133204","dateCreated":"1596824206","dateModified":"1596824206"},{"type":"update","diffId":"22331","author":"pulkit","id":"133193","dateCreated":"1596804674","dateModified":"1596804674"}],"dateCreated":"1596804674","dateModified":"1596824211","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8633","callsign":"HG","title":"share: introduce config option to store requires in .hg\/store","author":"pulkit","summary":"This introduces a config option which enabled stores the requirements on a\nrepository in store instead.\n\nWhen enabled, `.hg\/requires` will contain the `share-safe` requirement which\nmarks that the requirements are present in the store.\nThis is done so that repository requirements can be shared with shares made\nusing `hg share` command.\n\nAfter this patch, `hg share` checks whether the source repository has\nshare-safe requirement, if yes, it does not copy the requirements.\n\nTest for the new functionality is added and a test case in exitsing share tests\nis also added.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"165","dependsOn":["8913"],"reviewers":["durin42","marmoute"],"ccs":["indygreg","marmoute","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8633#133117, @indygreg wrote:\n> I left a handful of comments.\n> \n> Changing repo opening semantics and requirements handling is a bit scary.\n> \n> I'm generally in favor of separating working directory requirements from non-working directory requirements so I think this patch is a step in the right direction. There are a few alternative implementations worth considering. (Although I'm unsure if they are superior.)\n> \n> 1. Write the new requirements file in the `.hg` directory as `.hg\/store-requires` (or similar). Conceptually, we're talking about working directory and backend requirements. The \"store\" is just today's layout for storing backend data [which can be shared between working directories].\n> 2. Write a new requirements file for working directory specific requirements.\n\nHi, thanks a lot for the detailed review. I think we can have `.hg\/requires` as working directory specific and `.hg\/store\/requires` as store requirements.\n\nI have not yet implemented all the fixes you mentioned. Hence marking this as planned changes. However I have added some parents patches which should be good to review.","author":"pulkit","id":"133202","dateCreated":"1596805158","dateModified":"1596805158"},{"type":"plan-changes","author":"pulkit","id":"133200","dateCreated":"1596805158","dateModified":"1596805158"},{"type":"update","diffId":"22328","author":"pulkit","id":"133182","dateCreated":"1596804597","dateModified":"1596804597"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I can add an extra bonus point to the stake :-)","replyTo":"133125","isNewFile":"1","line":"378","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/store.py","diffId":"22171","author":"marmoute","id":"133134","dateCreated":"1596789600","dateModified":"1596789600"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I agreed that the requirements should be written at repository creation time (or upgrade time) and that is all. Maybe we should update the acquiring of the lock with some code checking we are actually holding a lock while doing this?\n\nThe upgrade usecase is a good argument in favor of moving the `requirement` file inside the `store` directory.","replyTo":"133123","isNewFile":"1","line":"1479","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/scmutil.py","diffId":"22171","author":"marmoute","id":"133133","dateCreated":"1596789600","dateModified":"1596789600"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Defaulting to \"requirements is a store requirement\" and explicitly flagging requirement that are working copy specific seems the safest.","replyTo":"133126","isNewFile":"1","line":"3518","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/localrepo.py","diffId":"22171","author":"marmoute","id":"133132","dateCreated":"1596789600","dateModified":"1596789600"},{"type":"inline","comment":"The requirements is named \"share-safe\" because after this change, the repository is safe to be shared. A repository do not need to be shared to \"share-safe\" the same way a watch does not need to be in the submerged to be water-proof.","replyTo":"133121","isNewFile":"1","line":"3342","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/localrepo.py","diffId":"22171","author":"marmoute","id":"133131","dateCreated":"1596789600","dateModified":"1596789600"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I had the same comment, and it turns out @pulkit is cleaning the duplication in later patches.","replyTo":"133118","isNewFile":"1","line":"545","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/localrepo.py","diffId":"22171","author":"marmoute","id":"133130","dateCreated":"1596789600","dateModified":"1596789600"},{"type":"inline","comment":"> So I think the request here would be to rename the requirement to `[exp-]store-requires` instead of `[exp-]share-safe`. If we wanted to add additional functionality governing how shared repos are opened, we should consider a separate requirement for that, independent of the one that indicates if a .hg\/store\/requires exists.\n\nHaving a galaxy on interdependent requirements can become a nightmare, because we either have to start dealing with all the corner case of some being enabled without the other or to add extra logic to make sure they are not being used without the other (and error out on bad configuration). So having simple requirement adding a consistent improvement seems like a better idea.\n\nThe share-safe requirement comes with other semantic beside the store one, for example regarding the reading of the configuration. So `store-requires` would be too narrow.","replyTo":"133119","isNewFile":"1","line":"553","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/localrepo.py","diffId":"22171","author":"marmoute","id":"133129","dateCreated":"1596789600","dateModified":"1596789600"},{"type":"inline","comment":">The swalloing of ENOENT doesn't sit well with me.\n\n> The repo opening semantics are such that .hg\/requires is read first and all subsequent repo opening is dictated by what is found inside that file.\n\n> I think that a .hg\/store\/requires file presence should be directly indicated via an entry in .hg\/requires - say store-requires - and if that entry is present, the file must be present: a missing file would be an error.\n\n+1 for having some explicit error. If we go the route of using a wc specific files, we should be strict on having it too.\n\nI don't have a strong opinion on having the requires file in the .hg\/store\/ directory yet. It seems cleaner\/clearer to do so.","replyTo":"133119","isNewFile":"1","line":"553","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/localrepo.py","diffId":"22171","author":"marmoute","id":"133128","dateCreated":"1596789600","dateModified":"1596789600"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8633#133117, @indygreg wrote:\n> I left a handful of comments.\n> \n> Changing repo opening semantics and requirements handling is a bit scary.\n> \n> I'm generally in favor of separating working directory requirements from non-working directory requirements so I think this patch is a step in the right direction. There are a few alternative implementations worth considering. (Although I'm unsure if they are superior.)\n> \n> 1. Write the new requirements file in the `.hg` directory as `.hg\/store-requires` (or similar). Conceptually, we're talking about working directory and backend requirements. The \"store\" is just today's layout for storing backend data [which can be shared between working directories].\n> 2. Write a new requirements file for working directory specific requirements.\n\nI would advocate for having a file for working-directory specific requirements. It is safer to assume all requirements are store specific unless explicitly specified otherwise.","author":"marmoute","id":"133127","dateCreated":"1596788676","dateModified":"1596788676"},{"type":"inline","comment":"What this is doing is blindly moving all requirements except `SHARESAFE_REQUIREMENT` to `.hg\/store\/requires`. The movement of most requirements there makes sense because they govern the \"store.\" However, there are requirements like `exp-sparse` which I believe only concern the working directory and should not be in the \"store.\"\n\nIf we want to go the approach of moving store-specific requirements into `.hg\/store\/requires`, I think we need to annotate whether requirements belong to the store or the non-store and write\/move requirements accordingly.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"3518","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/localrepo.py","diffId":"22171","author":"indygreg","id":"133126","dateCreated":"1596764590","dateModified":"1596764590"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Bonus points if you refactor this to be a proper data structure as part of this series. A space delimited list\/set makes no sense to me.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"378","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/store.py","diffId":"22171","author":"indygreg","id":"133125","dateCreated":"1596764590","dateModified":"1596764590"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Wait - why was `requires` here before?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"0","line":"450","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/store.py","diffId":"22171","author":"indygreg","id":"133124","dateCreated":"1596764590","dateModified":"1596764590"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Writing of the requirements file should be extremely rare. I don't think we need this lock here.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"1479","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/scmutil.py","diffId":"22171","author":"indygreg","id":"133123","dateCreated":"1596764590","dateModified":"1596764590"},{"type":"inline","comment":"The presence of this conditional here feels a bit weird to me: I feel like it might be better if we explicitly passed in 2 sets of requirements to read and this function were \"dumber.\"","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"1478","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/scmutil.py","diffId":"22171","author":"indygreg","id":"133122","dateCreated":"1596764590","dateModified":"1596764590"},{"type":"inline","comment":"It's really weird that this requirement has `share` in its name but it isn't dependent on being a shared repo.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"3342","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/localrepo.py","diffId":"22171","author":"indygreg","id":"133121","dateCreated":"1596764590","dateModified":"1596764590"},{"type":"inline","comment":"This whole block needs more comments because what it is trying to accomplish is important and nuanced.\n\nI would also consider rewriting the code so that we populate variables indicating the set of requirements to populate in `.hg\/requires` and `.hg\/store\/requires`. That way we have at most 2 calls to `writerequires()`, which I think will improve readability.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"3518","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/localrepo.py","diffId":"22171","author":"indygreg","id":"133120","dateCreated":"1596764590","dateModified":"1596764590"},{"type":"inline","comment":"The swalloing of `ENOENT` doesn't sit well with me.\n\nThe repo opening semantics are such that `.hg\/requires` is read first and all subsequent repo opening is dictated by what is found inside that file.\n\nI think that a `.hg\/store\/requires` file presence should be directly indicated via an entry in `.hg\/requires` - say `store-requires` - and if that entry is present, the file must be present: a missing file would be an error.\n\nSo I think the request here would be to rename the requirement to `[exp-]store-requires` instead of `[exp-]share-safe`. If we wanted to add additional functionality governing how shared repos are opened, we should consider a separate requirement for that, independent of the one that indicates if a `.hg\/store\/requires` exists.\n\nPut another way, we want repo opening semantics to be strictly defined with little room for interpretation. And we want `requires` entries to be narrowly scoped so there isn't ambiguity about what they mean.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"553","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/localrepo.py","diffId":"22171","author":"indygreg","id":"133119","dateCreated":"1596764590","dateModified":"1596764590"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I'm reasonably certain this logic is duplicated from somewhere. And opening shared repos is quirky enough that I'd feel better if there was a helper function for resolving the store vfs given a vfs for a `.hg` directory.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"545","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/localrepo.py","diffId":"22171","author":"indygreg","id":"133118","dateCreated":"1596764590","dateModified":"1596764590"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I left a handful of comments.\n\nChanging repo opening semantics and requirements handling is a bit scary.\n\nI'm generally in favor of separating working directory requirements from non-working directory requirements so I think this patch is a step in the right direction. There are a few alternative implementations worth considering. (Although I'm unsure if they are superior.)\n\n1. Write the new requirements file in the `.hg` directory as `.hg\/store-requires` (or similar). Conceptually, we're talking about working directory and backend requirements. The \"store\" is just today's layout for storing backend data [which can be shared between working directories].\n2. Write a new requirements file for working directory specific requirements.","author":"indygreg","id":"133117","dateCreated":"1596764590","dateModified":"1596764590"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I need to think about the implications of this change a bit more: the `requires` file plays an important part in how clients open repositories and there are significant backwards and forwards compatibility concerns.\n\nOne immediate request is to document semantics in `mercurial\/helptext\/internals\/requirements.txt` as part of this change.\n\nFWIW I thought I had typed up an internals document on how repositories are opened. But maybe I never submitted it for review or maybe it never landed.","author":"indygreg","id":"133021","dateCreated":"1596676125","dateModified":"1596676125"},{"type":"update","diffId":"22171","author":"pulkit","id":"132287","dateCreated":"1596292569","dateModified":"1596292569"},{"type":"update","diffId":"22068","author":"pulkit","id":"131564","dateCreated":"1595515925","dateModified":"1595515925"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21999","author":"pulkit","id":"131207","dateCreated":"1595338920","dateModified":"1595338920"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Maybe, can you check ?\n\nIn all cases, I would rather make the safe-share requirement consistent from the start. Can we have some code either setup `store` automatically, or reject with some error (whichever solution you prefer).","replyTo":"130953","isNewFile":"1","line":"3786","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/localrepo.py","diffId":"21740","author":"marmoute","id":"131131","dateCreated":"1595264739","dateModified":"1595264739"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I see this is done in D8655 thanks !","replyTo":"130717","isNewFile":"1","line":"537","lineLength":"17","path":"mercurial\/localrepo.py","diffId":"21740","author":"marmoute","id":"131130","dateCreated":"1595264739","dateModified":"1595264739"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Does not `share` extension implies that `store` is present?","replyTo":"130718","isNewFile":"1","line":"3786","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/localrepo.py","diffId":"21740","author":"pulkit","id":"130953","dateCreated":"1594995883","dateModified":"1594995883"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Refactored in next patch.","replyTo":"130717","isNewFile":"1","line":"537","lineLength":"17","path":"mercurial\/localrepo.py","diffId":"21740","author":"pulkit","id":"130952","dateCreated":"1594995883","dateModified":"1594995883"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Done.","replyTo":"130716","isNewFile":"1","line":"455","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/localrepo.py","diffId":"21740","author":"pulkit","id":"130951","dateCreated":"1594995883","dateModified":"1594995883"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21952","author":"pulkit","id":"130937","dateCreated":"1594995641","dateModified":"1594995641"},{"type":"inline","comment":"It looks like `share-safe` should requires `store`, can we make them dependent of each other.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"3786","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/localrepo.py","diffId":"21740","author":"marmoute","id":"130718","dateCreated":"1594835901","dateModified":"1594835901"},{"type":"inline","comment":"This looks like a lot of duplicated code, am I missing something ? Could we do less duplication?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"537","lineLength":"17","path":"mercurial\/localrepo.py","diffId":"21740","author":"marmoute","id":"130717","dateCreated":"1594835901","dateModified":"1594835901"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Until the semantic is fully implemented, this should be `exp-sharesafe` otherwise a non complying client could accessing without respecting the semantic.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"455","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/localrepo.py","diffId":"21740","author":"marmoute","id":"130716","dateCreated":"1594835901","dateModified":"1594835901"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"130715","dateCreated":"1594835901","dateModified":"1594835901"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21740","author":"pulkit","id":"129533","dateCreated":"1593597620","dateModified":"1593597620"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21702","author":"pulkit","id":"129341","dateCreated":"1593075165","dateModified":"1593075165"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21695","author":"pulkit","id":"129307","dateCreated":"1593003341","dateModified":"1593003341"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21677","author":"pulkit","id":"129190","dateCreated":"1592818586","dateModified":"1592818586"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21636","author":"pulkit","id":"128995","dateCreated":"1592233418","dateModified":"1592233418"}],"dateCreated":"1592233418","dateModified":"1596805158","status":"Changes Planned"},{"id":"8673","callsign":"HG","title":"config: add a .hg\/nonsharedrc which won't be shared in share-safe mode","author":"pulkit","summary":"Previous patches add a safe mode for sharing repositories which involve sharing\nof source requirements and config files.\n\nIn certain situations we might need to add a config to source repository which\nwe does not want to share. For this, we add a `.hg\/nonsharedrc` which won't be\nshared.\n\nThis also adds a `--non-shared` flag to `hg config` command to see the\nnon-shared config.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"40","dependsOn":["8660"],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["marmoute","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"update","diffId":"22330","author":"pulkit","id":"133191","dateCreated":"1596804657","dateModified":"1596804657"},{"type":"update","diffId":"22224","author":"pulkit","id":"132560","dateCreated":"1596460452","dateModified":"1596460452"},{"type":"update","diffId":"22072","author":"pulkit","id":"131569","dateCreated":"1595516059","dateModified":"1595516059"},{"type":"update","diffId":"22003","author":"pulkit","id":"131216","dateCreated":"1595339009","dateModified":"1595339009"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"131137","dateCreated":"1595265786","dateModified":"1595265786"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21980","author":"pulkit","id":"131095","dateCreated":"1595247391","dateModified":"1595247391"},{"type":"inline","comment":"It can have. Fixing in next version.","replyTo":"130736","isNewFile":"1","line":"733","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/localrepo.py","diffId":"21755","author":"pulkit","id":"130923","dateCreated":"1594980504","dateModified":"1594980504"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8673#130735, @marmoute wrote:\n> Request changes because of my inline question on the conditional. \n> \n> Extra question: Do we need a \"non-shared\" option on `hg config` to edit the new file ?\n\nSeems like yes. We will need one. Adding a patch for that too.","author":"pulkit","id":"130922","dateCreated":"1594980504","dateModified":"1594980504"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Why this limitation ? Can't a share have this file too ?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"733","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/localrepo.py","diffId":"21755","author":"marmoute","id":"130736","dateCreated":"1594836884","dateModified":"1594836884"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Request changes because of my inline question on the conditional. \n\nExtra question: Do we need a \"non-shared\" option on `hg config` to edit the new file ?","author":"marmoute","id":"130735","dateCreated":"1594836884","dateModified":"1594836884"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"130734","dateCreated":"1594836884","dateModified":"1594836884"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21755","author":"pulkit","id":"129584","dateCreated":"1593688670","dateModified":"1593688670"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21745","author":"pulkit","id":"129539","dateCreated":"1593597711","dateModified":"1593597711"}],"dateCreated":"1593597711","dateModified":"1596804674","status":"Needs Review"},{"id":"8660","callsign":"HG","title":"upgrade: support running upgrade if repository has share-safe requirement","author":"pulkit","summary":"This helps us in testing changing requirements of source repository and checking\nthat the shared repository works.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"33","dependsOn":["8659"],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["marmoute","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"update","diffId":"21979","author":"pulkit","id":"131094","dateCreated":"1595247363","dateModified":"1595247363"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8660#130732, @marmoute wrote:\n> Silly question: what happens when debugupdate repo is ran on a share ?\n\nNice question. We don't support running debugupgraderepo on shared repositories.","author":"pulkit","id":"130920","dateCreated":"1594980377","dateModified":"1594980377"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Silly question: what happens when debugupdate repo is ran on a share ?","author":"marmoute","id":"130732","dateCreated":"1594836773","dateModified":"1594836773"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"130731","dateCreated":"1594836773","dateModified":"1594836773"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21754","author":"pulkit","id":"129583","dateCreated":"1593688654","dateModified":"1593688654"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21707","author":"pulkit","id":"129362","dateCreated":"1593075240","dateModified":"1593075240"}],"dateCreated":"1593075240","dateModified":"1596804637","status":"Needs Review"},{"id":"8659","callsign":"HG","title":"config: add `--shared` flag to edit config file of shared source","author":"pulkit","summary":"With `format.exp-share-safe` enabled, we now read the `.hg\/hgrc` of the shared\nsource also.\nThis patch adds `--shared` flag to `hg config` command which can be used to edit\nthat shared source config file. It only works if the repository is shared one\nand is shared using the safe method.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"37","dependsOn":["8656"],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"update","diffId":"21978","author":"pulkit","id":"131089","dateCreated":"1595247350","dateModified":"1595247350"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"130729","dateCreated":"1594836703","dateModified":"1594836703"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21753","author":"pulkit","id":"129582","dateCreated":"1593688642","dateModified":"1593688642"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21744","author":"pulkit","id":"129537","dateCreated":"1593597683","dateModified":"1593597683"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21706","author":"pulkit","id":"129354","dateCreated":"1593075228","dateModified":"1593075228"}],"dateCreated":"1593075228","dateModified":"1596804626","status":"Needs Review"},{"id":"8656","callsign":"HG","title":"localrepo: load the share source .hg\/hgrc also in share-safe mode (API)","author":"pulkit","summary":"The second part of the Share Safe Plan is to share source repo config also.\nThis patch adds logic to load the source repo .hg\/hgrc if we are in share safe\nmode. On unshare, we copy and prepend source config to current repo so that\nconfig which was shared is persisted.\n\nA test is added to show that now if we enable a hook on the source repo, that\nalso runs on the shared repositories.\n\nAPI change as a new optional argument sharedvfs added to localrepo.loadhgrc()","testPlan":"","lineCount":"156","dependsOn":["8633"],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["Kwan","marmoute","durin42","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"update","diffId":"22329","author":"pulkit","id":"133187","dateCreated":"1596804614","dateModified":"1596804614"},{"type":"update","diffId":"22223","author":"pulkit","id":"132559","dateCreated":"1596460372","dateModified":"1596460372"},{"type":"update","diffId":"22071","author":"pulkit","id":"131568","dateCreated":"1595515991","dateModified":"1595515991"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Ha greate, I missed this whil read it :-)","replyTo":"131143","isNewFile":"1","line":"155","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-share-safe.t","diffId":"21977","author":"marmoute","id":"131221","dateCreated":"1595339226","dateModified":"1595339226"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"131220","dateCreated":"1595339225","dateModified":"1595339225"},{"type":"update","diffId":"22002","author":"pulkit","id":"131215","dateCreated":"1595338968","dateModified":"1595338968"},{"type":"inline","comment":"@marmoute test about trust","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"155","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-share-safe.t","diffId":"21977","author":"pulkit","id":"131143","dateCreated":"1595267070","dateModified":"1595267070"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8656#131136, @marmoute wrote:\n> I would be more confident if we get some explicit test about trust. However unshare is not working. \n\nThere is an explicit test about trust, kindly check inline comments, mentioned you.\n\nDidn't understand the second part, what's not working?","author":"pulkit","id":"131142","dateCreated":"1595267070","dateModified":"1595267085"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I would be more confident if we get some explicit test about trust. However unshare is now working. ","author":"marmoute","id":"131136","dateCreated":"1595265537","dateModified":"1595339193"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"131135","dateCreated":"1595265537","dateModified":"1595265537"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21977","author":"pulkit","id":"131084","dateCreated":"1595247332","dateModified":"1595247332"},{"type":"inline","comment":"There is apparently an unshare command. Sicne we read the source config, that source config need to be copied in the repository when unsharing. Can you add code and test for this?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"140","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-share-safe.t","diffId":"21752","author":"marmoute","id":"130727","dateCreated":"1594836663","dateModified":"1594836663"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Can you also add test for the trusting logic ? making sure the other hgrc is untrusted as expected when relevant ?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"136","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-share-safe.t","diffId":"21752","author":"marmoute","id":"130726","dateCreated":"1594836663","dateModified":"1594836663"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I am fine with taking this root (reading source `hgrc` and adding a `nonsharedrc`) as I think it is a better experience overall. **However**, we have to be prepared to drop a large backward compatibility breaking notice when we turn sharesafe on by default, because people relying on the config to not be shared might be up for a surprise.","author":"marmoute","id":"130725","dateCreated":"1594836663","dateModified":"1594836663"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"130724","dateCreated":"1594836663","dateModified":"1594836663"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Something in this stack (that I didn't push) breaks the phabricator extension. See phabricator.py line 170:\n```\n@eh.wrapfunction(localrepo, \"loadhgrc\")\ndef _loadhgrc(orig, ui, wdirvfs, hgvfs, requirements):\n```\nSo you'll need to do....something there. Maybe look for other wrappers in extensions too while you're there...","author":"durin42","id":"130587","dateCreated":"1594827887","dateModified":"1594827887"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21752","author":"pulkit","id":"129580","dateCreated":"1593688613","dateModified":"1593688613"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21742","author":"pulkit","id":"129535","dateCreated":"1593597651","dateModified":"1593597651"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21704","author":"pulkit","id":"129344","dateCreated":"1593075193","dateModified":"1593075193"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21699","author":"pulkit","id":"129326","dateCreated":"1593009081","dateModified":"1593009081"}],"dateCreated":"1593009081","dateModified":"1596804614","status":"Needs Review"},{"id":"6776","callsign":null,"title":"bookmarks: validate changes on push (issue6193) (BC)","author":"idlsoft","summary":"The actual validation is in bundle2.handlebookmark.\nThe rest of the changes are there to pass the force parameter.\nI've also made force available to hooks. That way one can validate who can and cannot use --force on a shared repo.\n\nIn other words, in the case of:\n\n    o 2\n    |  o 1 @\n    o\/ 0\n\nwhen I last pulled, @ was on 0, and now I'm doing hg push -B @, but\nsince my last pull the server advanced @ to 2, meaning it's a\nnon-linear update of the bookmark. This used to be allowed, and is now\nprohibited without --force.\n\n.. bc::\n\n    `hg push --bookmark` and `hg push -B` no longer move a bookmark\n    during push if the new bookmark position isn't a descendant of the\n    current bookmark position.\n\n.. feature::\n\n    Hooks are now able to tell if --force was specified when a bookmark was pushed.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"203","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["durin42","baymax"],"ccs":["mjacob","marmoute","pulkit","durin42","valentin.gatienbaron","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"I agree (with some previous answers) that adding more stuff to `--force` should be avoided.\n\nI planned to send a proposal (and patches) after the 5.5 release for adding more detailed options that can be used instead of `--force`. However, due to unexpected reasons, I don\u2019t know whether I\u2019ll have the time for doing that.","author":"mjacob","id":"133095","dateCreated":"1596747653","dateModified":"1596747653"},{"type":"comment","comment":"As I\n\n>>! In D6776#133068, @marmoute wrote:\n> As @valentin.gatienbaron pointed out, the now avoid adding more semantic to bare `--force` with an associated `--force-bookmark` especially because we want to be able to select the bookmarks that get force pushed here.\n\nI've expressed my concerns about that earlier, but ultimately it's a debate for core maintainers, we'll use whatever they decide.\nWithout a clear decision it didn't make much sense to modify the PR.\nI'm not sure if I'll have the bandwith to resume working on this, but glad to see it getting renewed attention.","author":"idlsoft","id":"133069","dateCreated":"1596736255","dateModified":"1596736255"},{"type":"comment","comment":"As @valentin.gatienbaron pointed out, the now avoid adding more semantic to bare `--force` with an associated `--force-bookmark` especially because we want to be able to select the bookmarks that get force pushed here.","author":"marmoute","id":"133068","dateCreated":"1596733563","dateModified":"1596733563"},{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117540","dateCreated":"1579887117","dateModified":"1579887117"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117539","dateCreated":"1579887117","dateModified":"1579887117"},{"type":"comment","comment":"> If you mean \"reject bad pushes as long as people don't push -f\", both versions implement this (the client-side check is not racy thanks to these check:bookmark bundle parts).\nThat was the idea. This implementation is a bit more flexible I think.\nSince it\u2019s server side, you don\u2019t have to upgrade your clients.\nIt\u2019s true old clients won\u2019t be able to use \u2014force, but new ones can.\nAnd you can add a trigger if you want to limit who can use \u2014force.\n\n","author":"idlsoft","id":"100533","dateCreated":"1568441725","dateModified":"1568441725"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6776#100506, @durin42 wrote:\n>>>! In D6776#100487, @valentin.gatienbaron wrote:\n>> I showed in D6847 the same change but implemented in exchange._processcompared. Tests pass.\n>> I think it'd make for a simpler final state: with the current change, the client sees that the bookmark is going to move sideways, decides this is fine, requests that the server validates that the bookmark is indeed moving sideways (which it does), but in the end the server rejects the move. In the suggested change, the client sees that the bookmark is going sideways and rejects it. This should be consistent with the way new heads or new branches or diverging rewrites are prevented.\n> \n> Isn't that a client-side change only though, so we still need functionality on the server to reject bad pushes? (I could be missing something.)\n\nIf you mean \"reject bad pushes as long as people don't push -f\", both versions implement this (the client-side check is not racy thanks to these check:bookmark bundle parts).\nIf you mean \"reject bad pushes, push -f or not\", a server-side hook is necessary for that, and hook.pretxnclose-bookmark should be able to do the job without any server code change. Server code change can certainly simplify writing such checks, but passing the force parameter on the procol is not needed.","author":"valentin.gatienbaron","id":"100532","dateCreated":"1568440575","dateModified":"1568440575"},{"type":"update","diffId":"16534","author":"idlsoft","id":"100519","dateCreated":"1568436765","dateModified":"1568436765"},{"type":"update","diffId":"16533","author":"idlsoft","id":"100518","dateCreated":"1568428463","dateModified":"1568428463"},{"type":"update","diffId":"16531","author":"idlsoft","id":"100513","dateCreated":"1568420567","dateModified":"1568420567"},{"type":"comment","comment":"> Isn't that a client-side change only though, so we still need functionality on the server to reject bad pushes? (I could be missing something.)\n\nI updated the diff to propagate --force properly","author":"idlsoft","id":"100511","dateCreated":"1568410784","dateModified":"1568420628"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6776#100487, @valentin.gatienbaron wrote:\n> I showed in D6847 the same change but implemented in exchange._processcompared. Tests pass.\n> I think it'd make for a simpler final state: with the current change, the client sees that the bookmark is going to move sideways, decides this is fine, requests that the server validates that the bookmark is indeed moving sideways (which it does), but in the end the server rejects the move. In the suggested change, the client sees that the bookmark is going sideways and rejects it. This should be consistent with the way new heads or new branches or diverging rewrites are prevented.\n\nIsn't that a client-side change only though, so we still need functionality on the server to reject bad pushes? (I could be missing something.)","author":"durin42","id":"100506","dateCreated":"1568382052","dateModified":"1568382052"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I showed in D6847 the same change but implemented in exchange._processcompared. Tests pass.\nI think it'd make for a simpler final state: with the current change, the client sees that the bookmark is going to move sideways, decides this is fine, requests that the server validates that the bookmark is indeed moving sideways (which it does), but in the end the server rejects the move. In the suggested change, the client sees that the bookmark is going sideways and rejects it. This should be consistent with the way new heads or new branches or diverging rewrites are prevented.\n","author":"valentin.gatienbaron","id":"100487","dateCreated":"1568349208","dateModified":"1568349208"},{"type":"update","diffId":"16524","author":"idlsoft","id":"100462","dateCreated":"1568310366","dateModified":"1568310366"},{"type":"inline","comment":"It will be nice to have documentation about what `force` does in the interface.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"194","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/interfaces\/repository.py","diffId":"16519","author":"pulkit","id":"100444","dateCreated":"1568268366","dateModified":"1568268366"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Hm, I think `conflicts` can be confusing but I don't have better suggestions here.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"2149","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/bundle2.py","diffId":"16519","author":"pulkit","id":"100443","dateCreated":"1568268366","dateModified":"1568268366"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I agree with @valentin.gatienbaron that `--force` is quite generic :(.  It may create new heads on the server even if I don't want to.","author":"pulkit","id":"100442","dateCreated":"1568268366","dateModified":"1568268366"},{"type":"comment","comment":"We're really close. I've uploaded my rebase of this to the latest dev hg (along with some minor test fixes). There's now only one failure:\n\n```--- \/Users\/augie\/Programming\/hg\/crew\/tests\/test-bookmarks-pushpull.t\n+++ \/Users\/augie\/Programming\/hg\/crew\/tests\/test-bookmarks-pushpull.t#b2-binary.err\n@@ -820,15 +820,17 @@\n   pushing to http:\/\/localhost:$HGPORT\/\n   searching for changes\n   no changes found\n-  updating bookmark Z\n-  [1]\n+  remote: push rejected: bookmark \"Z\" has changed\n+  remote: (run 'hg pull', resolve conflicts, and push again)\n+  abort: push failed on remote\n+  [255]\n   $ hg book -d Z\n   $ hg in -B http:\/\/localhost:$HGPORT\/\n   comparing with http:\/\/localhost:$HGPORT\/\n   searching for changed bookmarks\n      @                         9b140be10808\n      X                         9b140be10808\n-     Z                         0d2164f0ce0d\n+     Z                         9b140be10808\n      foo                       000000000000\n      foobar                    9b140be10808\n   $ hg pull -B Z http:\/\/localhost:$HGPORT\/\n@@ -853,7 +855,7 @@\n    * @                         1:9b140be10808\n      X                         1:9b140be10808\n      Y                         4:c922c0139ca0\n-     Z                         2:0d2164f0ce0d\n+     Z                         1:9b140be10808\n      foo                       -1:000000000000\n      foobar                    1:9b140be10808\n \n\nERROR: test-bookmarks-pushpull.t#b2-binary output changed\n```\n\nMy gut at this point is that we should:\n\n1) Document that legacy bookmark push behavior over pushkey is different\n2) Add a config to reject bookmark pushes over pushkey\n\nBut if there's a way to fix the pushkey behavior too, I'd be interested in that. I'm just not sure it's worth blocking on when that should only matter with very old servers. Obviously if others have stronger opinions they should speak up.","author":"durin42","id":"100418","dateCreated":"1568225245","dateModified":"1568225245"},{"type":"update","diffId":"16519","author":"durin42","id":"100417","dateCreated":"1568225133","dateModified":"1568225133"},{"type":"update","diffId":"16518","author":"idlsoft","id":"100413","dateCreated":"1568217168","dateModified":"1568217168"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I've uploaded my revised version (with the more complete commit message - no other changes) in case that helps.","author":"durin42","id":"100386","dateCreated":"1568212358","dateModified":"1568212358"},{"type":"reject","author":"durin42","id":"100385","dateCreated":"1568212358","dateModified":"1568212358"},{"type":"update","diffId":"16515","author":"durin42","id":"100382","dateCreated":"1568212309","dateModified":"1568212309"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I get a fair number of test failures with this, eg `test-bookmarks-corner-case.t`:\n\n```\n--- \/usr\/local\/google\/home\/augie\/hgtest\/tests\/test-bookmarks-corner-case.t\n+++ \/usr\/local\/google\/home\/augie\/hgtest\/tests\/test-bookmarks-corner-case.t.err\n@@ -178,11 +178,48 @@\n   $ hg push -R client-B -r book-B\n   pushing to ssh:\/\/user@dummy\/bookrace-server\n   searching for changes\n-  remote: adding changesets\n-  remote: adding manifests\n-  remote: adding file changes\n-  remote: added 1 changesets with 1 changes to 1 files\n-  updating bookmark book-B\n+  ** unknown exception encountered, please report by visiting\n+  ** https:\/\/mercurial-scm.org\/wiki\/BugTracker\n+  ** Python 2.7.16 (default, Apr  6 2019, 01:42:57) [GCC 7.3.0]\n+  ** Mercurial Distributed SCM (version 5.1.1+253-85a0f0de90e5)\n+  ** Extensions loaded:\n+  Traceback (most recent call last):\n+    File \"\/tmp\/hgtests.lYOPXh\/install\/bin\/hg\", line 43, in <module>\n+      dispatch.run()\n+    File \"\/tmp\/hgtests.lYOPXh\/install\/lib\/python\/mercurial\/dispatch.py\", line 99, in run\n+      status = dispatch(req)\n+    File \"\/tmp\/hgtests.lYOPXh\/install\/lib\/python\/mercurial\/dispatch.py\", line 225, in dispatch\n+      ret = _runcatch(req) or 0\n+    File \"\/tmp\/hgtests.lYOPXh\/install\/lib\/python\/mercurial\/dispatch.py\", line 376, in _runcatch\n+      return _callcatch(ui, _runcatchfunc)\n+    File \"\/tmp\/hgtests.lYOPXh\/install\/lib\/python\/mercurial\/dispatch.py\", line 384, in _callcatch\n+      return scmutil.callcatch(ui, func)\n+    File \"\/tmp\/hgtests.lYOPXh\/install\/lib\/python\/mercurial\/scmutil.py\", line 167, in callcatch\n+      return func()\n+    File \"\/tmp\/hgtests.lYOPXh\/install\/lib\/python\/mercurial\/dispatch.py\", line 367, in _runcatchfunc\n+      return _dispatch(req)\n+    File \"\/tmp\/hgtests.lYOPXh\/install\/lib\/python\/mercurial\/dispatch.py\", line 1021, in _dispatch\n+      cmdpats, cmdoptions)\n+    File \"\/tmp\/hgtests.lYOPXh\/install\/lib\/python\/mercurial\/dispatch.py\", line 756, in runcommand\n+      ret = _runcommand(ui, options, cmd, d)\n+    File \"\/tmp\/hgtests.lYOPXh\/install\/lib\/python\/mercurial\/dispatch.py\", line 1030, in _runcommand\n+      return cmdfunc()\n+    File \"\/tmp\/hgtests.lYOPXh\/install\/lib\/python\/mercurial\/dispatch.py\", line 1018, in <lambda>\n+      d = lambda: util.checksignature(func)(ui, *args, **strcmdopt)\n+    File \"\/tmp\/hgtests.lYOPXh\/install\/lib\/python\/mercurial\/util.py\", line 1682, in check\n+      return func(*args, **kwargs)\n+    File \"\/tmp\/hgtests.lYOPXh\/install\/lib\/python\/mercurial\/commands.py\", line 4667, in push\n+      opargs=opargs)\n+    File \"\/tmp\/hgtests.lYOPXh\/install\/lib\/python\/mercurial\/exchange.py\", line 570, in push\n+      _pushbundle2(pushop)\n+    File \"\/tmp\/hgtests.lYOPXh\/install\/lib\/python\/mercurial\/exchange.py\", line 1164, in _pushbundle2\n+      'force': pushop.force,\n+    File \"\/tmp\/hgtests.lYOPXh\/install\/lib\/python\/mercurial\/thirdparty\/concurrent\/futures\/_base.py\", line 457, in result\n+      return self.__get_result()\n+    File \"\/tmp\/hgtests.lYOPXh\/install\/lib\/python\/mercurial\/wireprotov1peer.py\", line 211, in sendcommands\n+      result = fn(**pycompat.strkwargs(args))\n+  TypeError: unbundle() got an unexpected keyword argument 'force'\n+  [1]\n```\n\nCould I get you to take a look? I like where this is going, but I don't have the time at the moment to hunt down the issues in the tests.","author":"durin42","id":"100381","dateCreated":"1568212284","dateModified":"1568212284"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Queued this with lots of content added to the commit message. Thanks!","author":"durin42","id":"100379","dateCreated":"1568211385","dateModified":"1568211385"},{"type":"accept","author":"durin42","id":"100378","dateCreated":"1568211385","dateModified":"1568211385"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Yes, server changed since your last pull, and you override the bookmark without so much as a warning.","author":"idlsoft","id":"100223","dateCreated":"1568053939","dateModified":"1568053939"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Clarifying I understand: this causes pushing a bookmark to fail in what cases that it currently succeeds? I think it's just the case of:\n\n  o 2\n  |  o 1 @\n  o\/ 0\n\nwhen I last pulled, `@` was on 0, and now I'm doing `hg push -B @`, but since my last pull the server advanced `@` to 2, meaning it's a non-linear update. Right?\n\nIf so, I wholeheartedly approve, as this behavior has previously burned me and I think it's well past time we started breaking some compatibility edges on bookmarks to make them actually useful to share.","author":"durin42","id":"100154","dateCreated":"1568043768","dateModified":"1568043768"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I see `--force` as a general \"I know what I'm doing, forget your checks\"  instruction.\nIf it's not, then all the variations would need their own `--force-heads`, `--force-bookmarks`, `--force-*`.\nMay be a bit much.\n\nAs for this being configurable?\nI, personally, don't see a lot of value in the current behavior.\nThere may be a use case, but the default behavior, useful for most users, would be to check it, I think.\n","author":"idlsoft","id":"99537","dateCreated":"1567523430","dateModified":"1567523430"},{"type":"comment","comment":"(just interested in this change, I don't have any power to actually accept it)\n\nInteresting. I've thought of `hg push -B` as forcing the move of the bookmark, and `hg push -r` as not forcing a bookmark move, as that's how they behave (well, mostly).\nI don't know if this is a bug: the intended behavior of `push -B` is not explicitly documented, but it at least appears to be consistent with `hg pull -B`.\nBut if it wasn't for compatibility, the behavior you're trying to implement looks superior: it gives the ability to ensure that a push either moves a bookmark forward or fails, which is clearly useful. We have an extension that makes `hg push -r BOOKMARK` have such a behavior, but the fewer extensions the better.\n\nBut given compatibility constraints, this behavior probably needs to be gated by a config option.\n\nAbout more technical aspects, I have a couple of remarks:\n- the change of behavior would be clearer in the diff if you added the test in a first change, and updated the code in a second change\n- the check should probably live in some combination of `exchange.{_processcompared,_pushb2checkbookmarks}` instead (that's where the \"move forward\" logic for push is right now)\n- using `hg push -f` to overwrite the remote bookmark is not great, because -f forces several completely unrelated things (new heads, removes race checks about bookmarks, something about obsolescence markers and something about phases). No one wants to bypass all these at once. Dedicated force flags seems better, perhaps `hg push --force-bookmark BOOKMARK`, to replicate the current behavior of `hg push -B BOOKMARK`.","author":"valentin.gatienbaron","id":"99521","dateCreated":"1567374841","dateModified":"1567374841"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This is a potential fix for https:\/\/bz.mercurial-scm.org\/show_bug.cgi?id=6193\nThe actual validation is in `bundle2.handlebookmark`.\nThe rest of the changes are there to pass the `force` parameter.\nI've also made `force` available to hooks. That way one can validate who can and cannot use `--force` on a shared repo.","author":"idlsoft","id":"99421","dateCreated":"1567188167","dateModified":"1567188167"},{"type":"update","diffId":"16341","author":"idlsoft","id":"99417","dateCreated":"1567187687","dateModified":"1567187687"}],"dateCreated":"1567187687","dateModified":"1596747653","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8873","callsign":"HG","title":"rhg: add harness tests for rhg files","author":"acezar","summary":"","testPlan":"","lineCount":"38","dependsOn":["8872"],"reviewers":["Alphare"],"ccs":["Alphare","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"update","diffId":"22243","author":"acezar","id":"132717","dateCreated":"1596529679","dateModified":"1596529679"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Maybe add an example with `| head` for completeness?","author":"Alphare","id":"132696","dateCreated":"1596468423","dateModified":"1596468423"},{"type":"accept","author":"Alphare","id":"132695","dateCreated":"1596468423","dateModified":"1596468423"},{"type":"update","diffId":"22238","author":"acezar","id":"132665","dateCreated":"1596464812","dateModified":"1596464812"}],"dateCreated":"1596464812","dateModified":"1596531555","status":"Needs Review"},{"id":"8652","callsign":"HG","title":"tests: test more cases where a file got replaced by a copy","author":"martinvonz","summary":"This adds a test where a file is modified on one branch and is renamed\nonto another file in another branch. That should ideally be\nautomatically resolved (by propagating the modification to the rename\ndestination). Alternatively, it could be considered a modify\/delete\nconflict. It should at least not be automatically resolved by ignoring\nthe modification. However, that is what actually happens with the\nchangeset-centric algorithm since I broke it in b4057d001760 (merge:\nwhen rename was made on both sides, use ancestor as merge base,\n2020-01-22). Before that commit, it resulted in a modify\/delete\nconflict. The filelog-centric algorithm was broken already before that\ncommit.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"67","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["indygreg"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"accept","author":"indygreg","id":"132389","dateCreated":"1596386381","dateModified":"1596386381"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21691","author":"martinvonz","id":"129264","dateCreated":"1592931829","dateModified":"1592931829"}],"dateCreated":"1592931829","dateModified":"1596386381","status":"Accepted"},{"id":"8347","callsign":"HG","title":"encoding: use special dictionary type for env variables on Windows","author":"indygreg","summary":"Environment variables on Windows are case insensitive and Python\ninternally uses a special dict type that normalizes all keys to\nuppercase.\n\nOur custom bytes-based environment variable dict on Windows was\nnot aware of this, leading to failures when looking up lower case\nenvironment variables (such as `http_proxy`).\n\nThis commit introduces a custom dict type that normalizes keys\nto uppercase on Windows. test-http-proxy.t passes after this\nchange, as a lookup of b'http_proxy' now succeeds.\n\nIt's worth noting that Python's behavior with regards to\nnormalizing all environment variables to uppercase is buggy.\nSee https:\/\/bugs.python.org\/issue28824. I preserved Python's\nbehavior for compatibility.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"36","dependsOn":["8346"],"reviewers":["marmoute","baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","marmoute","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"132220","dateCreated":"1596218195","dateModified":"1596218195"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"132219","dateCreated":"1596218195","dateModified":"1596218195"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Urg, this make me sad, but seems a reasonable way to move forward.","author":"marmoute","id":"126152","dateCreated":"1587148279","dateModified":"1587148279"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"126151","dateCreated":"1587148279","dateModified":"1587148279"},{"type":"update","diffId":"20920","author":"indygreg","id":"124617","dateCreated":"1585531830","dateModified":"1585531830"}],"dateCreated":"1585531830","dateModified":"1596218195","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8345","callsign":"HG","title":"tests: look for CRLF on Windows","author":"indygreg","summary":"The ui.editor code calls util.tonativeeol() to normalize line endings\nto the platform native format. So, editor files may have CRLF\nin them. For some reason, just this one specific test case was\nfailing on Python 3 on Windows. (The output before this change\nwas `...\\r (esc)`, but only on the first line of output. I suspect\nthe test harness output parser was getting confused by the specific\nbyte sequences in this output or something.\n\nI wanted to hack around this by filtering output via sed to remove\nthe CR. But check-code says this practice is apparently banned.\nSo I just made the test conditional.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"23","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["durin42","marmoute","baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","marmoute","mharbison72","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"132216","dateCreated":"1596218194","dateModified":"1596218194"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"132215","dateCreated":"1596218194","dateModified":"1596218194"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"126180","dateCreated":"1587153646","dateModified":"1587153646"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8345#126157, @marmoute wrote:\n> @mharbison72 @indygreg, IIRC Matt is saying this is the wrong fix. What's the status of this?\n\nI'm not sure that it's *wrong*, I'm just wondering if there's an encoding and\/or stdio issue lurking here somewhere.","author":"mharbison72","id":"126175","dateCreated":"1587149990","dateModified":"1587149990"},{"type":"comment","comment":"@mharbison72 @indygreg, IIRC Matt is saying this is the wrong fix. What's the status of this?","author":"marmoute","id":"126157","dateCreated":"1587148399","dateModified":"1587148399"},{"type":"comment","comment":"The test harness *should* match existing `\\n` output as a fallback, which got me to wondering if it was the `(esc)` at the end screwing it up.  I tried this patch:\n\n```\ndiff --git a\/tests\/run-tests.py b\/tests\/run-tests.py\n--- a\/tests\/run-tests.py\n+++ b\/tests\/run-tests.py\n@@ -2065,6 +2065,8 @@ class TTest(Test):\n             if PYTHON3:\n                 el = el[:-7].decode('unicode_escape') + '\\n'\n                 el = el.encode('utf-8')\n+                log('el: %s' % el)\n+                log(' l: %s' % l)\n             else:\n                 el = el[:-7].decode('string-escape') + '\\n'\n         if el == l or os.name == 'nt' and el[:-1] + b'\\r\\n' == l:\n```\n\n... and got this output:\n\n```\n$ time py -3 run-tests.py --local test-histedit-arguments.t#abortflag --view bcompare\nrunning 1 tests using 1 parallel processes\nel: b'pick 3d3ea1f3a10b 5 1234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345\\xc3\\xa3\\xc2\\x81\\xc2\\x82...\\n'\n l: b'pick 3d3ea1f3a10b 5 1234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345\\xe3\\x81\\x82...\\r\\n'\n```\n\nSo I'm not sure where the bytes are being lost.  If this doesn't suggest a larger problem, I've got no problem with this patch as written.  But I wonder if there's some stdio that needs to be patched up, because I thought I saw that pattern in some failing py3 tests at one point.","author":"mharbison72","id":"124639","dateCreated":"1585543859","dateModified":"1585543859"},{"type":"update","diffId":"20918","author":"indygreg","id":"124600","dateCreated":"1585531828","dateModified":"1585531828"}],"dateCreated":"1585531828","dateModified":"1596218194","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8346","callsign":"HG","title":"tests: force newlines to LF in tinyproxy.py","author":"indygreg","summary":"Yet another instance where we need to replace the sys.std* streams\nto prevent CRLF from creeping in on Windows.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"18","dependsOn":["8345"],"reviewers":["marmoute","baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","mharbison72","marmoute","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"132212","dateCreated":"1596218192","dateModified":"1596218192"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"132211","dateCreated":"1596218192","dateModified":"1596218192"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"126181","dateCreated":"1587153662","dateModified":"1587153662"},{"type":"comment","comment":"actually @mharbison72  comment on D8345 make me reconsider. Please allign the status of this with the status of D8345.","author":"marmoute","id":"126161","dateCreated":"1587148461","dateModified":"1587148461"},{"type":"resign","author":"marmoute","id":"126158","dateCreated":"1587148461","dateModified":"1587148461"},{"type":"comment","comment":"looks legit","author":"marmoute","id":"126155","dateCreated":"1587148303","dateModified":"1587148303"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"126154","dateCreated":"1587148303","dateModified":"1587148303"},{"type":"update","diffId":"20919","author":"indygreg","id":"124609","dateCreated":"1585531829","dateModified":"1585531829"}],"dateCreated":"1585531829","dateModified":"1596218193","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8348","callsign":"HG","title":"tests: force newlines to LF in inline Python script","author":"indygreg","summary":"Like we've done in what seems like an infinite stream of random\nscripts, we need to set sys.stdout to normalize to LF on\nPython 3 on Windows or else CRLF can creep in.\n\nWith this change, test-fix.t now passes on Python 3 on Windows.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"9","dependsOn":["8347"],"reviewers":["marmoute","baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","mharbison72","marmoute","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"132208","dateCreated":"1596218191","dateModified":"1596218191"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"132207","dateCreated":"1596218191","dateModified":"1596218191"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"126182","dateCreated":"1587153667","dateModified":"1587153667"},{"type":"comment","comment":"actually @mharbison72 comment on D8345 make me reconsider. Please allign the status of this with the status of D8345.","author":"marmoute","id":"126166","dateCreated":"1587148473","dateModified":"1587148473"},{"type":"resign","author":"marmoute","id":"126163","dateCreated":"1587148473","dateModified":"1587148473"},{"type":"comment","comment":"looks legit.","author":"marmoute","id":"126149","dateCreated":"1587148204","dateModified":"1587148204"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"126148","dateCreated":"1587148204","dateModified":"1587148204"},{"type":"update","diffId":"20921","author":"indygreg","id":"124625","dateCreated":"1585531832","dateModified":"1585531832"}],"dateCreated":"1585531832","dateModified":"1596218191","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"5496","callsign":"HG","title":"revset: add \"samebranch\" keyword argument to the merge revset","author":"angel.ezquerra","summary":"By default all merges are shown but if \"samebranch\" is set to False then merges\nwith the same branch (i.e. where both parents belong to the same branch) will\nbe filtered out.\n\nConversely, if \"samebranch\" is set to True then only merges with the same branch\nwill be shown.\n\nThis is useful to visualize at a high level the relationships between different\nbranches and how they are merged with each other.\n\nWith the addition of the merge(withbranch) idiom on a previous revision this\ncould already be done in a quite complicated way, by doing something like:\n\nmerge() and branch(somebranch) and not merge(somebranch)\n\nThis is not very practical ano only works for a single branch. Thus this new\noption is added.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"59","dependsOn":["5495"],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","marmoute","mharbison72","yuja","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"132205","dateCreated":"1596218190","dateModified":"1596218190"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"132204","dateCreated":"1596218190","dateModified":"1596218190"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Gentle ping on this series, the feature sounds interesting.","author":"marmoute","id":"126445","dateCreated":"1587571245","dateModified":"1587571287"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Maybe we should not try to use boolean. we could have\n\n`merge(parentbranches=\"same\")`\n\nwith the possible value being: `same`, `different`, `any` (an possibly some constains about `branch(p1(x)) == branch(x)`","author":"marmoute","id":"117278","dateCreated":"1579799198","dateModified":"1579799198"},{"type":"comment","comment":">   Maybe `anonymous`, defaulting to True?\n\nTo all: the default can't be True. It would break the current `merge()`\nrevset behavior. Only viable choice is to set the default to \"don't care\".\n\nAnd I think tri-state bool is confusing in this context. So, IMHO, it's\nbetter to add an argument taking a keyword string specifying constraint\nsuch as `merge(between=\"a-keyword-to-select-merges-of-named-branches\")`.\n\n> That's in the glossary under `Branch, anonymous`, so not technically\n> a merge, but I think it still conveys the point.\n\nI disagree. Merges of the same branch are pretty common if your team preferred\nmerge-based strategy. I wouldn't explicitly call new head pulled from public\nrepo as an anonymous head.\n\nIt can also be wrong if you're using bookmarks.","author":"yuja","id":"83416","dateCreated":"1548247882","dateModified":"1548247882"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D5496#82908, @angel.ezquerra wrote:\n>>>! In D5496#82671, @yuja wrote:\n> \n> Do you mean that the flag should only indicate whether you want to hide the same branch merges? I guess that is OK too, since the main use case for this flag is to hide the merge from the same branch. However I think we should change the flag name then. Perhaps \"hidesame\"? Or \"includesame\" or \"includeself\", defaulting to True? Any ideas?\n\nMaybe `anonymous`, defaulting to True?  That's in the glossary under `Branch, anonymous`, so not technically a merge, but I think it still conveys the point.\n\nI think I have a similar reaction as Yuya, but in the opposite direction- `merge(anonymous=True)` makes me think that's all that's of interest.  So maybe `withanonymous`?\n\nI do like the compactness of:\n\n    merge() => all merges\n    merge(anonymous=True) => only merges with matching (p1, p2) branch names\n    merge(anonymous=False) => only merges with different (p1, p2) branch names\n\nOtherwise finding only anonymous merges is something like `merge() - merge(anonymous=False)`, and it took some thinking to get there with the double negative.\n\nBut I have no idea how well that applies to other things if we set that precedent here, and don't feel that strongly about it.","author":"mharbison72","id":"83200","dateCreated":"1548181703","dateModified":"1548181703"},{"type":"comment","comment":">   > Okay, I didn't notice that. And it's tricky to map `samebranch=False` to\n>   >  \"different branch\" constraint. I would read it as \"I don't care whether\n>   >  the branches are the same or not.\"\n>   >\n>   > We can instead express it as `merge() - merge(samebranch=True)`.\n>   \n>   Do you mean that the flag should only indicate whether you want to hide the same branch merges?\n\nI just mean tri-state bool is confusing. `<whatever>=False` sounds like we\ndon't care about the `<whatever>` condition.\n\n> I guess that is OK too, since the main use case for this flag is to hide the merge from the same branch. However I think we should change the flag name then. Perhaps \"hidesame\"? Or \"includesame\" or \"includeself\", defaulting to True? Any ideas?\n\nIt could be an argument taking a string like `'same'`, but I can't think\nof nice names. What's the best term describing a merge between two named\nbranches?","author":"yuja","id":"83052","dateCreated":"1547734900","dateModified":"1547734900"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D5496#82671, @yuja wrote:\n>>   > `[, samebranch]` or [, samebranch=False]`.\n>>   \n>>   I guess that means:\n>>   \n>>   @predicate('merge([withbranch [, samebranch=None]])', safe=True)\n>>   \n>>   Right? (I realized that it is incorrect to say that samebranch's default value is False).\n> \n> Okay, I didn't notice that. And it's tricky to map `samebranch=False` to\n> \"different branch\" constraint. I would read it as \"I don't care whether\n> the branches are the same or not.\"\n\n>>! In D5496#82671, @yuja wrote:\n>>   > `[, samebranch]` or [, samebranch=False]`.\n>>   \n>>   I guess that means:\n>>   \n>>   @predicate('merge([withbranch [, samebranch=None]])', safe=True)\n>>   \n>>   Right? (I realized that it is incorrect to say that samebranch's default value is False).\n> \n> Okay, I didn't notice that. And it's tricky to map `samebranch=False` to\n> \"different branch\" constraint. I would read it as \"I don't care whether\n> the branches are the same or not.\"\n> \n> We can instead express it as `merge() - merge(samebranch=True)`.\n\nDo you mean that the flag should only indicate whether you want to hide the same branch merges? I guess that is OK too, since the main use case for this flag is to hide the merge from the same branch. However I think we should change the flag name then. Perhaps \"hidesame\"? Or \"includesame\" or \"includeself\", defaulting to True? Any ideas?\n","author":"angel.ezquerra","id":"82908","dateCreated":"1547662268","dateModified":"1547662268"},{"type":"comment","comment":">   > `[, samebranch]` or [, samebranch=False]`.\n>   \n>   I guess that means:\n>   \n>   @predicate('merge([withbranch [, samebranch=None]])', safe=True)\n>   \n>   Right? (I realized that it is incorrect to say that samebranch's default value is False).\n\nOkay, I didn't notice that. And it's tricky to map `samebranch=False` to\n\"different branch\" constraint. I would read it as \"I don't care whether\nthe branches are the same or not.\"\n\nWe can instead express it as `merge() - merge(samebranch=True)`.\n\n>   >   if len(matchfns) == 1:\n>   >       # fast path for common case\n>   >       return subset.filter(matchfn[0], ...)\n>   >   else:\n>   >       return subset.filter(lambda r: all(p(r) for p in matchfn), ...)\n>   \n>   Do you think this makes the code simpler?\n\nYes. The original version was hard to find all possible call paths.\nSeparate function per constraint is easier to follow.\n\n> In any case, if you think this approach is best I can do it, but perhaps it would be a little better to keep a single subset.filter call as follows:\n>   \n>     if len(matchfns) == 1:\n>         finalmatchfn = matchfns[0]\n>     else:\n>         finalmatchfn = lambda r: all(p(r) for p in matchfns)\n>     return subset.filter(finalmatchfn, condrepr='<merge>')\n\nI don't care about these differences.","author":"yuja","id":"82671","dateCreated":"1547644201","dateModified":"1547644201"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D5496#82394, @yuja wrote:\n>> -@predicate('merge(withbranch)', safe=True)\n>> +@predicate('merge(withbranch, samebranch=True)', safe=True)\n> \n> `[, samebranch]` or [, samebranch=False]`.\n\nI guess that means:\n\n@predicate('merge([withbranch [, samebranch=None]])', safe=True)\n\nRight? (I realized that it is incorrect to say that samebranch's default value is False).\n\n>>      withbranch = ''\n>>      if 'withbranch' in args:\n>>          withbranch = getstring(args['withbranch'],\n>>                                 _('withbranch argument must be a string'))\n>>          kind, branchname, branchmatcher = stringutil.stringmatcher(withbranch)\n>> +    samebranch = None\n>> +    if 'samebranch' in args:\n>> +        # i18n: \"samebranch\" is a keyword\n>> +        samebranch = getboolean(args['samebranch'],\n>> +            _('samebranch argument must be a True or False'))\n>>      cl = repo.changelog\n>>      # create the function that will be used to filter the subset\n>>      if withbranch:\n>>          # matchfn is a function that returns true when a revision\n>>          # is a merge and the second parent belongs to a branch that\n>>          # matches the withbranch pattern (which can be a literal or a regex)\n>>          if kind == 'literal':\n>> -            matchfn = lambda r: (cl.parentrevs(r)[1] != -1\n>> -                                 and repo[r].p2().branch() == withbranch)\n>> +            basematchfn = lambda r: (cl.parentrevs(r)[1] != -1\n>> +                                     and repo[r].p2().branch() == withbranch)\n>>          else:\n>> -            matchfn = lambda r: (cl.parentrevs(r)[1] != -1\n>> -                                 and branchmatcher(repo[r].p2().branch()))\n>> -    else:\n>> -        # matchfn is a function that returns true when a revision is a merge\n>> -        matchfn = lambda r: cl.parentrevs(r)[1] != -1\n>> +            basematchfn = lambda r: (cl.parentrevs(r)[1] != -1\n>> +                                     and branchmatcher(repo[r].p2().branch()))\n>> +    else:\n>> +        basematchfn = lambda r: cl.parentrevs(r)[1] != -1\n>> +    if samebranch is None:\n>> +        matchfn = basematchfn\n>> +    else:\n>> +        # if samebranch was specified, build a new match function\n>> +        # that on top of basematch checks if the parents belong (or not)\n>> +        # to the same branch (depending on the value of samebranch)\n>> +        def matchfn(r):\n>> +            c = repo[r]\n>> +            if not basematchfn(r):\n>> +                return False\n>> +            issamebranchmerge = c.p1().branch() == c.p2().branch()\n>> +            return issamebranchmerge if samebranch else not issamebranchmerge\n> \n> These conditions can be formed as followed:\n> \n> ```\n> matchfns = [lambda r: cl.parentrevs(r)[1] != -1]\n> if withbranch:\n>     matchfns.append(lambda r: branchmatcher(repo[r].p2().branch()))\n> if samebranch:\n>     matchfns.append(samebranchmatchfn)\n> \n> if len(matchfns) == 1:\n>     # fast path for common case\n>     return subset.filter(matchfn[0], ...)\n> else:\n>     return subset.filter(lambda r: all(p(r) for p in matchfn), ...)\n> ```\n\nDo you think this makes the code simpler? In any case, if you think this approach is best I can do it, but perhaps it would be a little better to keep a single subset.filter call as follows:\n\n```\nif len(matchfns) == 1:\n    finalmatchfn = matchfns[0]\nelse:\n    finalmatchfn = lambda r: all(p(r) for p in matchfns)\nreturn subset.filter(finalmatchfn, condrepr='<merge>')\n```\n\nWhat do you think?\n","author":"angel.ezquerra","id":"82562","dateCreated":"1547596927","dateModified":"1547596927"},{"type":"update","diffId":"13211","author":"angel.ezquerra","id":"82415","dateCreated":"1547508409","dateModified":"1547508409"},{"type":"comment","comment":"> -@predicate('merge(withbranch)', safe=True)\n> +@predicate('merge(withbranch, samebranch=True)', safe=True)\n\n`[, samebranch]` or [, samebranch=False]`.\n\n>      withbranch = ''\n>      if 'withbranch' in args:\n>          withbranch = getstring(args['withbranch'],\n>                                 _('withbranch argument must be a string'))\n>          kind, branchname, branchmatcher = stringutil.stringmatcher(withbranch)\n> +    samebranch = None\n> +    if 'samebranch' in args:\n> +        # i18n: \"samebranch\" is a keyword\n> +        samebranch = getboolean(args['samebranch'],\n> +            _('samebranch argument must be a True or False'))\n>      cl = repo.changelog\n>      # create the function that will be used to filter the subset\n>      if withbranch:\n>          # matchfn is a function that returns true when a revision\n>          # is a merge and the second parent belongs to a branch that\n>          # matches the withbranch pattern (which can be a literal or a regex)\n>          if kind == 'literal':\n> -            matchfn = lambda r: (cl.parentrevs(r)[1] != -1\n> -                                 and repo[r].p2().branch() == withbranch)\n> +            basematchfn = lambda r: (cl.parentrevs(r)[1] != -1\n> +                                     and repo[r].p2().branch() == withbranch)\n>          else:\n> -            matchfn = lambda r: (cl.parentrevs(r)[1] != -1\n> -                                 and branchmatcher(repo[r].p2().branch()))\n> -    else:\n> -        # matchfn is a function that returns true when a revision is a merge\n> -        matchfn = lambda r: cl.parentrevs(r)[1] != -1\n> +            basematchfn = lambda r: (cl.parentrevs(r)[1] != -1\n> +                                     and branchmatcher(repo[r].p2().branch()))\n> +    else:\n> +        basematchfn = lambda r: cl.parentrevs(r)[1] != -1\n> +    if samebranch is None:\n> +        matchfn = basematchfn\n> +    else:\n> +        # if samebranch was specified, build a new match function\n> +        # that on top of basematch checks if the parents belong (or not)\n> +        # to the same branch (depending on the value of samebranch)\n> +        def matchfn(r):\n> +            c = repo[r]\n> +            if not basematchfn(r):\n> +                return False\n> +            issamebranchmerge = c.p1().branch() == c.p2().branch()\n> +            return issamebranchmerge if samebranch else not issamebranchmerge\n\nThese conditions can be formed as followed:\n\n```\nmatchfns = [lambda r: cl.parentrevs(r)[1] != -1]\nif withbranch:\n    matchfns.append(lambda r: branchmatcher(repo[r].p2().branch()))\nif samebranch:\n    matchfns.append(samebranchmatchfn)\n\nif len(matchfns) == 1:\n    # fast path for common case\n    return subset.filter(matchfn[0], ...)\nelse:\n    return subset.filter(lambda r: all(p(r) for p in matchfn), ...)\n```","author":"yuja","id":"82395","dateCreated":"1547435478","dateModified":"1547435478"},{"type":"update","diffId":"13205","author":"angel.ezquerra","id":"82389","dateCreated":"1547419525","dateModified":"1547419525"},{"type":"update","diffId":"13018","author":"angel.ezquerra","id":"81361","dateCreated":"1546801412","dateModified":"1546801412"}],"dateCreated":"1546801412","dateModified":"1596218190","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"6312","callsign":"HG","title":"branchcache: update the filteredhash if we update the tiprev","author":"pulkit","summary":"We update the tiprev and in next if statement we check whether the branchcache\nis valid or not. If the update of tiprev happens, then definitely\nself.validfor() will return False because filteredhash is old now.\n\nLet's update the filteredhash if we update the tiprev also. This prevents us\nfrom entering the loop where we iter all the heads, and find the tiprev.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"1","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","marmoute","yuja","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"132202","dateCreated":"1596218189","dateModified":"1596218189"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"132201","dateCreated":"1596218189","dateModified":"1596218189"},{"type":"comment","comment":"reping","author":"marmoute","id":"126454","dateCreated":"1587571582","dateModified":"1587571582"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This seems useful but lingering. @pulkit what's the status of this.","author":"marmoute","id":"117300","dateCreated":"1579800073","dateModified":"1579800073"},{"type":"comment","comment":">          if ntiprev > self.tiprev:\n>              self.tiprev = ntiprev\n>              self.tipnode = cl.node(ntiprev)\n> +            self.filteredhash = scmutil.filteredhash(repo, self.tiprev)\n>  \n>          if not self.validfor(repo):\n>              # cache key are not valid anymore\n\nand update `self.filteredhash` later again, which smells. Instead, shouldn't\nwe check the validity first, and take the fast path only if it was valid?\n\n```\nif self.validfor(repo):  # was valid, can take fast path\n    self.tiprev = ntiprev\n    self.tipnode = cl.node(ntiprev)\nelse:  # bad luck, recompute tiprev\/tipnode\n    ...\nself.filteredhash = scmutil.filteredhash(repo, self.tiprev)\n```","author":"yuja","id":"91967","dateCreated":"1556440717","dateModified":"1556440717"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14927","author":"pulkit","id":"91837","dateCreated":"1556320974","dateModified":"1556320974"}],"dateCreated":"1556320974","dateModified":"1596218189","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8653","callsign":"HG","title":"copies: handle more cases where a file got replaced by a copy","author":"martinvonz","summary":"This patch fixes the changeset-centric version in a pretty\nstraight-forward way. It fixes it to automatically resolve the\nconflict, which is better than resulting in a modify\/delete conflict\nas it was before b4057d001760 (merge: when rename was made on both\nsides, use ancestor as merge base, 2020-01-22).\n\nI'll leave it for later to test and explicitly handle cases where\nfiles have been renamed to the same target on different sides of the\nmerge.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"26","dependsOn":["8652"],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["durin42","pulkit","marmoute","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"inline","comment":"\n> I didn't reply to this for a long time because the categorical \"So we must have a case for both. Please update your series with such test coverage.\" made me feel like you didn't want to have a discussion about this. I talked to @durin42 about this a bit. He pointed out that maybe the root cause of the disagreement was that my \"seems excessive to have tests for both cases\" above was not motivated, because I didn't realize then that you thought that we really should needed testing of both cases\n> My reason for not testing both is that there's no different code branches in this patch that would be tested by duplicating the tests\n\n\nDoing a merge involves many layers of code (computing the merge, applying working copy action, applying dirstate action, actually creating commit, etc). Small difference in the merge cases pass through the same code path at one level, but in different code paths in others. Overall the whole merge stack has been a prolific source of bugs for the last handful of months, and we know that small differences such as the one we are discussing right now may be source of bugs. In addition, the code paths of today are not the code paths of tomorrow, and this code is already actively being refactored.\n\nYou successfully isolated a new family of cases where Mercurial misbehave and there are two clear sub-cases introduced by a small variations. It seems a small price (mostly duplicating the test entries with the small variation) coming with a big benefit (increasing the number of cases covered by our tests for an important, complicated and unfortunately often buggy logic).\n\nSo could you please add explicit testing for all the new merge cases?","replyTo":"130892","isNewFile":"1","line":"655","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/merge.py","diffId":"21692","author":"marmoute","id":"132194","dateCreated":"1596214680","dateModified":"1596214680"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Yeah, that's fair -- we're probably never going to make that work (kind of like how status between two commits will include changed-and-then-reverted files).","replyTo":"129966","isNewFile":"1","line":"499","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-copies.t","diffId":"21692","author":"martinvonz","id":"130893","dateCreated":"1594918949","dateModified":"1594918949"},{"type":"inline","comment":"> > > Do we have a test for this case ?\n> >\n> > I can change the existing test case if you prefer, but it seems excessive to have tests for both cases.\n>\n> They are two case, one where a merge is necessary, one where no merge is needed. So we must have a case for both. Please update your series with such test coverage.\n\nI didn't reply to this for a long time because the categorical \"So we must have a case for both. Please update your series with such test coverage.\" made me feel like you didn't want to have a discussion about this. I talked to @durin42 about this a bit. He pointed out that maybe the root cause of the disagreement was that my \"seems excessive to have tests for both cases\" above was not motivated, because I didn't realize then that you thought that we really should needed testing of both cases. My reason for not testing both is that there's no different code branches in this patch that would be tested by duplicating the tests (unlike your guess on #mercurial, it's not that I argued for \"intentionally lower the test coverage\"). I think the code branches that would be covered by the two tests you suggest are in `filemerge.py`. I think we should have more specific tests if we want to make sure that that code works well when one side of the code is unchanged, but that seems outside the scope of this patch. Or did you consider that and you see a particular risk between interaction between the code I'm adding here and the filemerge code?","replyTo":"129965","isNewFile":"1","line":"655","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/merge.py","diffId":"21692","author":"martinvonz","id":"130892","dateCreated":"1594918949","dateModified":"1594918949"},{"type":"inline","comment":"The main different I see here is that in the existing case, the BROKEN case have a hope to get fixed (unless I understand them wrong). While this one is hopelessly wrong and won't be fixed (with this copy tracing strategy). So I would not use BROKEN for that case.","replyTo":"129962","isNewFile":"1","line":"499","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-copies.t","diffId":"21692","author":"marmoute","id":"129966","dateCreated":"1594234221","dateModified":"1594234221"},{"type":"inline","comment":"> >    If I read them correctly, these merge are not merge since on side is unchanged. Should we be using a get here?\n>\n> I don't think ACTION_GET lets you get from a different path name. It looks like all the other actions we create when a file was copied are using ACTION_MERGE, even if some could probably be \"optimized\" for the case where no change was made on one side.\n\nI see. @pulkit is starting a refactoring of the action declaration that might lift this limitation (or make it trivial to lift it). Can you distinct between the two case in your code (using the current option, ACTION_MERGE, in both) to make it simpler to update this code in the future.\n\n> > Do we have a test for this case ?\n>\n> I can change the existing test case if you prefer, but it seems excessive to have tests for both cases.\n\nThey are two case, one where a merge is necessary, one where no merge is needed. So we must have a case for both. Please update your series with such test coverage.","replyTo":"129963","isNewFile":"1","line":"655","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/merge.py","diffId":"21692","author":"marmoute","id":"129965","dateCreated":"1594234221","dateModified":"1594234221"},{"type":"inline","comment":"> If I read them correctly, these merge are not merge since on side is unchanged. Should we be using a get here?\n\nI don't think `ACTION_GET` lets you get from a different path name. It looks like all the other actions we create when a file was copied are using `ACTION_MERGE`, even if some could probably be \"optimized\" for the case where no change was made on one side.\n\n> What happens if some change happens to y after the rename. This is a case were we need an actual merge. What is the current behavior ? What is the behavior after the patch ?\n\nIt's what you would probably expect:\n\n* Before this patch, the copy tracing doesn't work and the changes to `x` are not propagated to `y`. Therefore, no merge conflict happens.\n* After this patch, the copy tracing works and the changes to `x` are propagated to `y`. Therefore, there will be a merge conflict (if nearby lines are modified, of course).\n\n> Do we have a test for this case ?\n\nI can change the existing test case if you prefer, but it seems excessive to have tests for both cases.","replyTo":"129765","isNewFile":"1","line":"655","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/merge.py","diffId":"21692","author":"martinvonz","id":"129963","dateCreated":"1594231278","dateModified":"1594231278"},{"type":"inline","comment":"We already have several tests of broken behavior in the test suite (just grep for \"BROKEN\") , so I think that's fine.","replyTo":"129764","isNewFile":"1","line":"499","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-copies.t","diffId":"21692","author":"martinvonz","id":"129962","dateCreated":"1594231278","dateModified":"1594231278"},{"type":"inline","comment":"If I read them correctly, these merge are not merge since on side is unchanged. Should we be using a `get` here?\n\nWhat happens if some change happens to `y` after the rename. This is a case were we need an actual merge. What is the current behavior ? What is the behavior after the patch ?\n\nDo we have a test for this case ?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"655","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/merge.py","diffId":"21692","author":"marmoute","id":"129765","dateCreated":"1594129459","dateModified":"1594129459"},{"type":"inline","comment":"We should probably specify that the \"BROKEN\" part will remain as such (compared to changeset centric one who can detect it). Otherwise, it might looks like an in-progress fix that never landed.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"499","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-copies.t","diffId":"21692","author":"marmoute","id":"129764","dateCreated":"1594129459","dateModified":"1594129459"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I have enough question I am I moving this to \"change requested\" I might move it to \"accepted\" withotu actual change depending of the answers.","author":"marmoute","id":"129763","dateCreated":"1594129459","dateModified":"1594129459"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"129762","dateCreated":"1594129459","dateModified":"1594129459"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21692","author":"martinvonz","id":"129271","dateCreated":"1592931830","dateModified":"1592931830"}],"dateCreated":"1592931830","dateModified":"1596214680","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8624","callsign":"HG","title":"wip: this does not help but seems less wrong","author":"durin42","summary":"","testPlan":"","lineCount":"8","dependsOn":["8623"],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["marmoute","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"According to IRC discussion, this series is not ready for review, so moving it out of yadda.","author":"marmoute","id":"132192","dateCreated":"1596211459","dateModified":"1596211459"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"132191","dateCreated":"1596211459","dateModified":"1596211459"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21625","author":"durin42","id":"128919","dateCreated":"1591904782","dateModified":"1591904782"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21622","author":"durin42","id":"128911","dateCreated":"1591895079","dateModified":"1591895079"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21617","author":"durin42","id":"128896","dateCreated":"1591891688","dateModified":"1591891688"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21598","author":"durin42","id":"128807","dateCreated":"1591735938","dateModified":"1591735938"}],"dateCreated":"1591735938","dateModified":"1596211459","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8572","callsign":"HG","title":"merge: remove special case for in-memory merge","author":"durin42","summary":"This is now handled by the mergestate object, which knows if mergedriver works.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"4","dependsOn":["8504"],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["marmoute","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"According to IRC discussion, this series is not ready for review, so moving it out of yadda.","author":"marmoute","id":"132188","dateCreated":"1596211441","dateModified":"1596211441"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"132187","dateCreated":"1596211441","dateModified":"1596211441"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21615","author":"durin42","id":"128892","dateCreated":"1591891679","dateModified":"1591891679"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21453","author":"durin42","id":"127911","dateCreated":"1589917987","dateModified":"1589917987"}],"dateCreated":"1589917987","dateModified":"1596211441","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8504","callsign":"HG","title":"diff: add experimental support for \"merge diffs\"","author":"durin42","summary":"This does not currently pass tests, because in-memory merge can't\nrepresent conflicts, which this requires. I intend to shave that yak\nnext.\n\nPublishing the patch now as motivation for the preceding patches, and\nin case someone has feedback on the approach.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"139","dependsOn":["8515"],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["marmoute","martinvonz","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"According to IRC discussion, this series is not ready for review, so moving it out of yadda.","author":"marmoute","id":"132184","dateCreated":"1596211431","dateModified":"1596211431"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"132183","dateCreated":"1596211431","dateModified":"1596211431"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21596","author":"durin42","id":"128796","dateCreated":"1591735924","dateModified":"1591735924"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I like the idea a lot :-)","author":"marmoute","id":"128627","dateCreated":"1591639633","dateModified":"1591639633"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21515","author":"durin42","id":"128255","dateCreated":"1590697637","dateModified":"1590697637"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21449","author":"durin42","id":"127892","dateCreated":"1589839719","dateModified":"1589839719"},{"type":"inline","comment":"How about calling these \"pctx1\" and \"pctx2\" instead so the same name doesn't change meaning and so you don't have to reassign \"ctx2\"?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"2501","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/commands.py","diffId":"21344","author":"martinvonz","id":"127304","dateCreated":"1589252257","dateModified":"1589252257"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Like the test case you added below. There, base is \"8\", left is \"z\", right is \"y\", and resolved is \"z\", if I'm reading that right.","replyTo":"127274","isNewFile":"1","line":"187","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-diff-change.t","diffId":"21318","author":"martinvonz","id":"127303","dateCreated":"1589252257","dateModified":"1589252257"},{"type":"comment","comment":"For anyone curious what's left, the test currently fails like this:\n\n```\n--- tests\/test-diff-change.t\n+++ tests\/test-diff-change.t.err\n@@ -241,9 +241,15 @@\n   ->>>>>>> other: d9e7de69eac3 - test: new file\n    9\n    10\n+  diff -r 5010caab09f6 new-file-p2.txt\n+  --- \/dev\/null\tThu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000\n+  +++ b\/new-file-p2.txt\tThu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000\n+  @@ -0,0 +1,1 @@\n+  +this file is new in p2 of the merge\n \n There must _NOT_ be a .hg\/merge directory leftover.\n   $ test ! -e .hg\/merge\n-\n-\n-  $ cd ..\n+  [1]\n+\n+\n+  $ cd ..\n```","author":"durin42","id":"127289","dateCreated":"1589237340","dateModified":"1589237340"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21344","author":"durin42","id":"127285","dateCreated":"1589237313","dateModified":"1589237313"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21342","author":"durin42","id":"127275","dateCreated":"1589235716","dateModified":"1589235716"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Not sure what you mean. Can you elaborate?","replyTo":"127228","isNewFile":"1","line":"187","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-diff-change.t","diffId":"21318","author":"durin42","id":"127274","dateCreated":"1589233597","dateModified":"1589233597"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Wow, that feels obvious in hindsight. And then we can also default-true when tweakdefaults is on.","replyTo":"127226","isNewFile":"1","line":"2413","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/commands.py","diffId":"21318","author":"durin42","id":"127273","dateCreated":"1589233597","dateModified":"1589233597"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21341","author":"durin42","id":"127271","dateCreated":"1589232873","dateModified":"1589232873"},{"type":"inline","comment":"We should have at least one test showing a \"four-way diff\" with base, left, right, and resolved states.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"187","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-diff-change.t","diffId":"21318","author":"martinvonz","id":"127228","dateCreated":"1588955093","dateModified":"1588955093"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Want to set a specific merge tool here while running this?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"2512","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/commands.py","diffId":"21318","author":"martinvonz","id":"127227","dateCreated":"1588955093","dateModified":"1588955093"},{"type":"inline","comment":"How about making this boolean-valued instead? I'd expect `hg diff --merge -c <some merge commit>` to work. That will also make it easy to provide a config option to always enable it. (I don't ever want the current behavior for `-c` with merge commits.)","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"2413","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/commands.py","diffId":"21318","author":"martinvonz","id":"127226","dateCreated":"1588955093","dateModified":"1588955093"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Or should we allow non-merge commits so one can always pass `--merge` without thinking (e.g. in `[defaults]`)?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"2506","lineLength":"1","path":"mercurial\/commands.py","diffId":"21318","author":"martinvonz","id":"127225","dateCreated":"1588955093","dateModified":"1588955093"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Seems like it would be cleaner to combine these two.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"2503","lineLength":"15","path":"mercurial\/commands.py","diffId":"21318","author":"martinvonz","id":"127224","dateCreated":"1588955093","dateModified":"1588955093"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Looking forward to using this!","author":"martinvonz","id":"127223","dateCreated":"1588955093","dateModified":"1588955093"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21318","author":"durin42","id":"127159","dateCreated":"1588886767","dateModified":"1588886767"}],"dateCreated":"1588886767","dateModified":"1596211431","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8515","callsign":"HG","title":"filemerge: add a hacktastic version of internal:merge3 for merge diffs","author":"durin42","summary":"This is a version of merge3 that always reports success, so that\nconflict markers get preserved without us having to implement conflict\nstorage for in-memory merge. Credit to martinvonz for the idea. The\nonly planned consumer of this \"merge tool\" is my upcoming merge-diffs\nfunctionality, though I suspect it could be useful in other ways.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"16","dependsOn":["8570"],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["marmoute","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"According to IRC discussion, this series is not ready for review, so moving it out of yadda.","author":"marmoute","id":"132181","dateCreated":"1596211430","dateModified":"1596211430"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"132180","dateCreated":"1596211430","dateModified":"1596211430"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21624","author":"durin42","id":"128918","dateCreated":"1591904770","dateModified":"1591904770"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21614","author":"durin42","id":"128891","dateCreated":"1591891671","dateModified":"1591891671"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8515#128781, @durin42 wrote:\n>>>! In D8515#128625, @marmoute wrote:\n>> Is this to represent conflict for in-memory merge ? Or to help with the \"merge diff\" display ? Because I am not sure how it help (or is used) in the first case, but I can see it tremendously useful for mergediff (since it show how conflict got resolved)\n> \n> It's basically for mergediffs. I'll revise the commit message.\n\nCan you also clearly state the intended usage in the  documentation of the merge tool itself. Can you update you update diff in that direction ?","author":"marmoute","id":"128828","dateCreated":"1591778982","dateModified":"1591778982"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8515#128625, @marmoute wrote:\n> Is this to represent conflict for in-memory merge ? Or to help with the \"merge diff\" display ? Because I am not sure how it help (or is used) in the first case, but I can see it tremendously useful for mergediff (since it show how conflict got resolved)\n\nIt's basically for mergediffs. I'll revise the commit message.","author":"durin42","id":"128781","dateCreated":"1591735481","dateModified":"1591735481"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Is this to represent conflict for in-memory merge ? Or to help with the \"merge diff\" display ? Because I am not sure how it help (or is used) in the first case, but I can see it tremendously useful for mergediff (since it show how conflict got resolved)","author":"marmoute","id":"128625","dateCreated":"1591639562","dateModified":"1591639562"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21514","author":"durin42","id":"128254","dateCreated":"1590697630","dateModified":"1590697630"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21448","author":"durin42","id":"127888","dateCreated":"1589839715","dateModified":"1589839715"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21345","author":"durin42","id":"127290","dateCreated":"1589237738","dateModified":"1589237738"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21343","author":"durin42","id":"127278","dateCreated":"1589237308","dateModified":"1589237308"}],"dateCreated":"1589237308","dateModified":"1596211430","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8570","callsign":"HG","title":"rebase: use context to load mergestate instead of loading it directly","author":"durin42","summary":"","testPlan":"","lineCount":"2","dependsOn":["8569"],"reviewers":["martinvonz","marmoute"],"ccs":["marmoute","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"According to IRC discussion, this series is not ready for review, so moving it out of yadda.","author":"marmoute","id":"132178","dateCreated":"1596211395","dateModified":"1596211395"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"132177","dateCreated":"1596211395","dateModified":"1596211395"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21447","author":"durin42","id":"127881","dateCreated":"1589839711","dateModified":"1589839711"}],"dateCreated":"1589839711","dateModified":"1596211395","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8569","callsign":"HG","title":"merge: get mergestate from context instead of directly","author":"durin42","summary":"This causes `hg fix` (and probably others) to use the new in-memory mergestate\nobject instead of the on-disk one, which may incidentally correct some\ndefects.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"7","dependsOn":["8568"],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["marmoute","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"According to IRC discussion, this series is not ready for review, so moving it out of yadda.","author":"marmoute","id":"132174","dateCreated":"1596211388","dateModified":"1596211388"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"132173","dateCreated":"1596211388","dateModified":"1596211388"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21613","author":"durin42","id":"128890","dateCreated":"1591891663","dateModified":"1591891663"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21446","author":"durin42","id":"127873","dateCreated":"1589839708","dateModified":"1589839708"}],"dateCreated":"1589839708","dateModified":"1596211388","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8568","callsign":"HG","title":"overlayworkingctx: implement mergestate() using in-memory mergestate","author":"durin42","summary":"This will allow `hg fix` to use the mergestate() method without regressing.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"6","dependsOn":["8567"],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["marmoute","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"According to IRC discussion, this series is not ready for review, so moving it out of yadda.","author":"marmoute","id":"132170","dateCreated":"1596211381","dateModified":"1596211381"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"132169","dateCreated":"1596211381","dateModified":"1596211381"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21621","author":"durin42","id":"128910","dateCreated":"1591895058","dateModified":"1591895058"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21612","author":"durin42","id":"128889","dateCreated":"1591891658","dateModified":"1591891658"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21595","author":"durin42","id":"128794","dateCreated":"1591735909","dateModified":"1591735909"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21513","author":"durin42","id":"128253","dateCreated":"1590697619","dateModified":"1590697619"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21445","author":"durin42","id":"127865","dateCreated":"1589839704","dateModified":"1589839704"}],"dateCreated":"1589839704","dateModified":"1596211381","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8567","callsign":"HG","title":"mergestate: implement trivial in-memory mergestate","author":"durin42","summary":"This is the dumbest possible \"mergestate\" implementation: it doesn't actually\nhandle conflict storage in the slightest, but for the current in-memory merge\ncases it works great, and prevents us from accidentally touching .hg\/merge\nwhile doing non-wdir operations.\n\nNOT DONE: this breaks tests in future changes in the series, currently getting\nstuck on the \"premerge()\" method in the mergestate object.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"168","dependsOn":["8566"],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["marmoute","martinvonz","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"According to IRC discussion, this series is not ready for review, so moving it out of yadda.","author":"marmoute","id":"132166","dateCreated":"1596211376","dateModified":"1596211376"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"132165","dateCreated":"1596211376","dateModified":"1596211376"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21623","author":"durin42","id":"128917","dateCreated":"1591904758","dateModified":"1591904758"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21620","author":"durin42","id":"128909","dateCreated":"1591895054","dateModified":"1591895054"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21611","author":"durin42","id":"128888","dateCreated":"1591891654","dateModified":"1591891654"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21544","author":"durin42","id":"128403","dateCreated":"1591026612","dateModified":"1591026612"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21519","author":"durin42","id":"128260","dateCreated":"1590701636","dateModified":"1590701636"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This is now much closer! I'm down to a handful of failures, all like this:\n\n```\n--- tests\/test-copies-in-changeset.t\n+++ hgtest\/tests\/test-copies-in-changeset.t#sidedata.err\n@@ -358,6 +358,8 @@\n   $ hg ci -qm 'rename a to b'\n   $ hg rebase -d 1 --config rebase.experimental.inmemory=yes\n   rebasing 2:* \"rename a to b\" (tip) (glob)\n+  hit merge conflicts; re-running rebase without in-memory merge\n+  rebasing 2:b977edf6f839 \"rename a to b\" (tip)\n   merging a and b to b\n   saved backup bundle to $TESTTMP\/rebase-rename\/.hg\/strip-backup\/*-*-rebase.hg (glob)\n   $ hg st --change . --copies\n\nERROR: test-copies-in-changeset.t#sidedata output changed\n--- tests\/test-rebase-inmemory.t\n+++ tests\/test-rebase-inmemory.t.err\n@@ -780,6 +780,8 @@\n   $ hg ci -qm 'rename a to b'\n   $ hg rebase -d 1\n   rebasing 2:b977edf6f839 \"rename a to b\" (tip)\n+  hit merge conflicts; re-running rebase without in-memory merge\n+  rebasing 2:b977edf6f839 \"rename a to b\" (tip)\n   merging a and b to b\n   saved backup bundle to $TESTTMP\/rebase-rename\/.hg\/strip-backup\/b977edf6f839-0864f570-rebase.hg\n   $ hg st --copies --change .\n@@ -801,6 +803,8 @@\n   $ hg ci -qm 'rename a to b'\n   $ hg rebase -d 1\n   rebasing 2:b977edf6f839 \"rename a to b\" (tip)\n+  hit merge conflicts; re-running rebase without in-memory merge\n+  rebasing 2:b977edf6f839 \"rename a to b\" (tip)\n   merging a and b to b\n   saved backup bundle to $TESTTMP\/rebase-rename-empty\/.hg\/strip-backup\/b977edf6f839-0864f570-rebase.hg\n   $ hg st --copies --change .\n@@ -820,6 +824,8 @@\n   $ echo a2 > a\n   $ hg ci -qm 'modify a'\n   $ hg rebase -r . -d 1 --collapse\n+  rebasing 2:41c4ea50d4cf \"modify a\" (tip)\n+  hit merge conflicts; re-running rebase without in-memory merge\n   rebasing 2:41c4ea50d4cf \"modify a\" (tip)\n   merging b and a to b\n   saved backup bundle to $TESTTMP\/rebase-rename-collapse\/.hg\/strip-backup\/41c4ea50d4cf-b90b7994-rebase.hg\n\nERROR: test-rebase-inmemory.t output changed\n```\n\nClearly I'm tickling some merge logic that previously went unused in the IMM case, and it'll take some investigating, but I suspect that long-term this will let us run more merges in-memory without having to revert to on-disk merge logic.","author":"durin42","id":"128259","dateCreated":"1590700340","dateModified":"1590700340"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21518","author":"durin42","id":"128258","dateCreated":"1590700204","dateModified":"1590700204"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21512","author":"durin42","id":"128252","dateCreated":"1590697614","dateModified":"1590697614"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21452","author":"durin42","id":"127909","dateCreated":"1589917966","dateModified":"1589917966"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Can we really get the merge driver to work with `memmergestate`? Maybe it's better to make `memmergestate.mergedriver` raise an exception so we catch it?\n\nAh, I was curious how that could possibly work so far and it turns out that there is indeed a check at `merge.py:2039`. You could move that exception to `memmergestate.mergedriver`, I think.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"94","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/mergestate.py","diffId":"21444","author":"martinvonz","id":"127899","dateCreated":"1589872826","dateModified":"1589872826"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21444","author":"durin42","id":"127857","dateCreated":"1589839700","dateModified":"1589839700"}],"dateCreated":"1589839700","dateModified":"1596211376","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8564","callsign":"HG","title":"fakemergerecord: get mergestate via context","author":"durin42","summary":"","testPlan":"","lineCount":"7","dependsOn":["8563"],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["marmoute","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"According to IRC discussion, this series is not ready for review, so moving it out of yadda.","author":"marmoute","id":"132162","dateCreated":"1596211364","dateModified":"1596211364"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"132161","dateCreated":"1596211364","dateModified":"1596211364"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21441","author":"durin42","id":"127834","dateCreated":"1589839689","dateModified":"1589839689"}],"dateCreated":"1589839689","dateModified":"1596211364","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8563","callsign":"HG","title":"localrepo: get mergestate via context","author":"durin42","summary":"","testPlan":"","lineCount":"12","dependsOn":["8626"],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["marmoute","martinvonz","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"According to IRC discussion, this series is not ready for review, so moving it out of yadda.","author":"marmoute","id":"132158","dateCreated":"1596211359","dateModified":"1596211359"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"132157","dateCreated":"1596211359","dateModified":"1596211359"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Okay, now localrepo correctly uses the same context across whole operations. This almost certainly avoids some bugs, given that committing a memctx was (surprise!) reading the mergestate from disk.","author":"durin42","id":"128912","dateCreated":"1591895201","dateModified":"1591895201"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21619","author":"durin42","id":"128905","dateCreated":"1591895045","dateModified":"1591895045"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I can probably do a VC tomorrow (US morning time) if that help","author":"marmoute","id":"128897","dateCreated":"1591892735","dateModified":"1591892735"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21609","author":"durin42","id":"128883","dateCreated":"1591891642","dateModified":"1591891642"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8563#128829, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>! In D8563#128768, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>>! In D8563#128630, @marmoute wrote:\n>>> Is your concern about the creation of new \"independant\" wctc (by each call of `repo[None]`) instead of reusing the same wctx for the full operation ?\n>> \n>> Yes. I guess I'd rather have the pattern `wctx.mergestate()` indicate that it works with either a `workingctx` or a `overlayworkingctx`, while direct access to `mergestate.read()` indicates that we care about the actual working copy.\n> \n> Is there any reason to distinct the two ? From afar, it would be better for the mergestate module to become an implementation details and every access to happen throught the context for consistency.\n> \n> Do you have concr\u00eat example where distincting the two seems better ?\n\nShould we have a brief email thread or IRC discussion about this? We seem to be conflating workingctx and overlayworkingctx here, and I'm not sure we're all on the same page.","author":"durin42","id":"128882","dateCreated":"1591891541","dateModified":"1591891541"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8563#128768, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>! In D8563#128630, @marmoute wrote:\n>> Is your concern about the creation of new \"independant\" wctc (by each call of `repo[None]`) instead of reusing the same wctx for the full operation ?\n> \n> Yes. I guess I'd rather have the pattern `wctx.mergestate()` indicate that it works with either a `workingctx` or a `overlayworkingctx`, while direct access to `mergestate.read()` indicates that we care about the actual working copy.\n\nIs there any reason to distinct the two ? From afar, it would be better for the mergestate module to become an implementation details and every access to happen throught the context for consistency.\n\nDo you have concr\u00eat example where distincting the two seems better ?","author":"marmoute","id":"128829","dateCreated":"1591779348","dateModified":"1591779348"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8563#128630, @marmoute wrote:\n> Is your concern about the creation of new \"independant\" wctc (by each call of `repo[None]`) instead of reusing the same wctx for the full operation ?\n\nYes. I guess I'd rather have the pattern `wctx.mergestate()` indicate that it works with either a `workingctx` or a `overlayworkingctx`, while direct access to `mergestate.read()` indicates that we care about the actual working copy.","author":"martinvonz","id":"128768","dateCreated":"1591721207","dateModified":"1591721207"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Is your concern about the creation of new \"independant\" wctc (by each call of `repo[None]`) instead of reusing the same wctx for the full operation ?","author":"marmoute","id":"128630","dateCreated":"1591692103","dateModified":"1591692103"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8563#128618, @marmoute wrote:\n> @martinvonz do you mean that these patch break normal behavior if taken without other patch ?\n\nNo, but I think those two places should be able to accept an `overlayworkingctx`, so it might be better to leave them unchanged for now and to switch them directly to use `wctx.mergestate()` once we have a `wctx` passed in here.","author":"martinvonz","id":"128628","dateCreated":"1591640858","dateModified":"1591640858"},{"type":"comment","comment":"@martinvonz do you mean that these patch break normal behavior if taken without other patch ?","author":"marmoute","id":"128618","dateCreated":"1591639037","dateModified":"1591639037"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21509","author":"durin42","id":"128249","dateCreated":"1590697594","dateModified":"1590697594"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Yeah, I'm happy to reorder patches, this is still a bit \"work-in-progress unfortunately.","author":"durin42","id":"127901","dateCreated":"1589915936","dateModified":"1589915936"},{"type":"comment","comment":"It looks like the latter two hunks in this file will need to be able to read the merge state from an `overlayworkingctx`. Maybe that's coming in a later patch, but I think it would be easier to follow if this code was changed only then (very much related to my comment on an earlier patch).","author":"martinvonz","id":"127897","dateCreated":"1589869851","dateModified":"1589869851"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21440","author":"durin42","id":"127827","dateCreated":"1589839685","dateModified":"1589839685"}],"dateCreated":"1589839685","dateModified":"1596211359","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8626","callsign":"HG","title":"memctx: add mergestate method","author":"durin42","summary":"","testPlan":"","lineCount":"3","dependsOn":["8562"],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["marmoute","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"According to IRC discussion, this series is not ready for review, so moving it out of yadda.","author":"marmoute","id":"132155","dateCreated":"1596211358","dateModified":"1596211358"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"132154","dateCreated":"1596211358","dateModified":"1596211358"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21618","author":"durin42","id":"128899","dateCreated":"1591895041","dateModified":"1591895041"}],"dateCreated":"1591895041","dateModified":"1596211358","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8801","callsign":"HG","title":"obsstore: refactor v1 logic to fix 32 byte hash support","author":"joerg.sonnenberger","summary":"Refactor the v1 logic to determine the node parsing based on the flag.\nMove the predecessor out of the fixed part and handle it like the other\nnodes, removing most of the duplicated code for parsing 20\/32 bytes\nhashes.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"84","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":[],"ccs":["mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"update","diffId":"22079","author":"joerg.sonnenberger","id":"131599","dateCreated":"1595529299","dateModified":"1595529299"}],"dateCreated":"1595529299","dateModified":"1595529299","status":"Needs Review"},{"id":"8784","callsign":"HG","title":"tags: adjust file node cache to have space for 32 bytes node ids","author":"joerg.sonnenberger","summary":"The .hgtags processing uses two different caches. The first cache is\nessentially a global version of all .hgtags files and a textual format\nwithout hard size requirements. The second cache stores the file node of\nthe .hgtags file for those changesets that modify it as fixed size\nrecords. Use a new file name for this record and pad the entries to 32\nbytes in preparation for replacing SHA1.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"181","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":[],"ccs":["mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"update","diffId":"22032","author":"joerg.sonnenberger","id":"131355","dateCreated":"1595370342","dateModified":"1595370342"}],"dateCreated":"1595370342","dateModified":"1595370342","status":"Needs Review"},{"id":"8783","callsign":"HG","title":"storageutil: allow modern hash sizes for fileids","author":"joerg.sonnenberger","summary":"","testPlan":"","lineCount":"8","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":[],"ccs":["mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"update","diffId":"22028","author":"joerg.sonnenberger","id":"131344","dateCreated":"1595364117","dateModified":"1595364117"}],"dateCreated":"1595364117","dateModified":"1595364117","status":"Needs Review"},{"id":"6259","callsign":"HG","title":"[POC] revset: on-disk cache for children queries","author":"joerg.sonnenberger","summary":"This is a proof of concept for further discussion.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"175","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["pulkit","mercurial-patches","marmoute","martinvonz","indygreg","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"Yes, it's still a POC. I wanted to make sure that it works in the modern world, but I am still considering the idea in the context of larger changes for transactional caches.","author":"joerg.sonnenberger","id":"131111","dateCreated":"1595252777","dateModified":"1595252777"},{"type":"comment","comment":"@joerg.sonnenberger Is this still a POC? I see that you updated the code.","author":"pulkit","id":"131101","dateCreated":"1595249913","dateModified":"1595249913"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21871","author":"joerg.sonnenberger","id":"130326","dateCreated":"1594605152","dateModified":"1594605152"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This is POC, so moving out of review.","author":"marmoute","id":"126451","dateCreated":"1587571538","dateModified":"1587571538"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"126450","dateCreated":"1587571538","dateModified":"1587571538"},{"type":"comment","comment":"If we have one, we'll want it to be generic (so also for changelog). Do we have performance number of the time it takes to build it ?","author":"marmoute","id":"117298","dateCreated":"1579799991","dateModified":"1579799991"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Perhaps we'd want this to not be specifically for revsets? We could also write to it when we write to the changelog to keep it up to date.","author":"martinvonz","id":"91118","dateCreated":"1555507748","dateModified":"1555507748"},{"type":"comment","comment":"For the NetBSD repository, a trivial test with the new cache:\n\n```\ntime hg log -r '1000~-400' -T {node} > \/dev\/null\nreal\t0m1.898s\ntime hg log -r '1000~-400' -T {node} > \/dev\/null\nreal\t0m0.170s\ntime hg log -r '1000~-1' -T {node} > \/dev\/null\nreal\t0m0.166s\ntime hg log -r '440000~-1' -T {node} > \/dev\/null\nreal\t0m0.170s\n```\n\nFirst one includes the time to initially warmup the cache.\n\nWithout the cache:\n```\ntime hg log -r '1000~0' -T {node} > \/dev\/null\nreal\t0m0.196s\ntime hg log -r '1000~-1' -T {node} > \/dev\/null\nreal\t0m0.825s\ntime hg log -r '1000~-2' -T {node} > \/dev\/null\nreal\t0m1.288s\ntime hg log -r '1000~-400' -T {node} > \/dev\/null\nreal\t3m23.201s\ntime hg log -r '440000~-1' -T {node} > \/dev\/null\nreal\t0m0.182s\n```\n\nIn other words, building the cache is amortised by one or two queries for children early up in the tree. The cache still provides a good benefit nearer to tip.","author":"joerg.sonnenberger","id":"91110","dateCreated":"1555505679","dateModified":"1555505679"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Do you have performance numbers to share? Substantial wins would definitely pique my interest :)","author":"indygreg","id":"91066","dateCreated":"1555498467","dateModified":"1555498467"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14789","author":"joerg.sonnenberger","id":"91040","dateCreated":"1555454599","dateModified":"1555454599"}],"dateCreated":"1555454599","dateModified":"1595252777","status":"Needs Review"},{"id":"8646","callsign":"HG","title":"update: suggest --merge while `hg up` across topo branches","author":"khanchi97","summary":"Before this patch, during `hg up` across topological branches with\ndirty working directory we suggested the user to \"commit or update\n--clean to discard\"\n\nI think suggesting --merge is better than --clean (which discard\nchanges with no backup). We can keep all the three options, but\nprobably then we will have sacrifice length of message.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"18","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":[],"ccs":["marmoute","mjacob","martinvonz","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"plan-changes","author":"khanchi97","id":"130915","dateCreated":"1594924854","dateModified":"1594924854"},{"type":"comment","comment":"also: can we move this to \"change planned\" so that it stop showing up in yadda?","author":"marmoute","id":"130693","dateCreated":"1594830668","dateModified":"1594830668"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8646#129257, @mjacob wrote:\n> I think it would be a good idea to mention both `--clean` and `--merge`, but mentioning only `--merge` is better than mentioning only `--clean`.\n\n+1 on that.\n\nI hope we can get this soon. ","author":"marmoute","id":"130692","dateCreated":"1594830589","dateModified":"1594830589"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I think it would be a good idea to mention both `--clean` and `--merge`, but mentioning only `--merge` is better than mentioning only `--clean`.","author":"mjacob","id":"129257","dateCreated":"1592917202","dateModified":"1592917202"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8646#129176, @martinvonz wrote:\n> We have not made this change before because there is no `hg update --abort`. Do we have that feature yet (I haven't followed all the changes recently)?\n\nAh, okay. I see. No, we don't have that feature yet. I sent a patch for `hg update --abort` but I got stuck in a subrepo case where we can lose some changes. I think now I am gonna revisit that case again, and try to figure out the fix or will start a discussion on that. Thanks :)\n(both of these have some discussion on it https:\/\/phab.mercurial-scm.org\/D7786 https:\/\/phab.mercurial-scm.org\/D6735)","author":"khanchi97","id":"129178","dateCreated":"1592806928","dateModified":"1592806928"},{"type":"comment","comment":"We have not made this change before because there is no `hg update --abort`. Do we have that feature yet (I haven't followed all the changes recently)?","author":"martinvonz","id":"129176","dateCreated":"1592802286","dateModified":"1592802286"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21674","author":"khanchi97","id":"129170","dateCreated":"1592791949","dateModified":"1592791949"}],"dateCreated":"1592791949","dateModified":"1594924854","status":"Changes Planned"},{"id":"8616","callsign":"HG","title":"merge: chain copies with existing copies in working copy","author":"martinvonz","summary":"This makes the merge code chain and filter copies when grafting with\ncopies already in the working copy. For example, if the working copy\nhas renamed file A to B and you somehow graft in a change that renames\nB to C, then that will now become a rename from A to C.  That will\nsoon be necessary for `hg rebase --collapse`. It seems that we don't\nhave any existing cases where chaining makes a difference.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"16","dependsOn":["8595"],"reviewers":[],"ccs":["marmoute","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"inline","comment":"Ah, I see. See `copies.filter()` (called `copies._filter()` at head) for details.","replyTo":"130830","isNewFile":"1","line":"1916","lineLength":"5","path":"mercurial\/merge.py","diffId":"21564","author":"martinvonz","id":"130852","dateCreated":"1594913281","dateModified":"1594913281"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Changes planned to earlier patch in the series","author":"martinvonz","id":"130840","dateCreated":"1594913028","dateModified":"1594913028"},{"type":"plan-changes","author":"martinvonz","id":"130839","dateCreated":"1594913028","dateModified":"1594913028"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Previously, theses extra `ifs` clause were not necessary, Now they appears. Why do they become necessary now ?","replyTo":"130688","isNewFile":"1","line":"1916","lineLength":"5","path":"mercurial\/merge.py","diffId":"21564","author":"marmoute","id":"130830","dateCreated":"1594910013","dateModified":"1594910013"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I guess I don't understand what your question was in that case. Can you rephrase it?","replyTo":"130677","isNewFile":"1","line":"1916","lineLength":"5","path":"mercurial\/merge.py","diffId":"21564","author":"martinvonz","id":"130688","dateCreated":"1594830155","dateModified":"1594830155"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I don't understand how it answser my question of \"why does these new cases pops up?\"","replyTo":"128874","isNewFile":"1","line":"1916","lineLength":"5","path":"mercurial\/merge.py","diffId":"21564","author":"marmoute","id":"130677","dateCreated":"1594829934","dateModified":"1594829934"},{"type":"comment","comment":"(I have an unsubmitted question laying around for over a month\u2026)","author":"marmoute","id":"130676","dateCreated":"1594829934","dateModified":"1594829934"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21608","author":"martinvonz","id":"128876","dateCreated":"1591886052","dateModified":"1591886052"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Did you miss the comment I added on line 1914 or do you think it's not enough? Each case is documented there.","replyTo":"128870","isNewFile":"1","line":"1916","lineLength":"5","path":"mercurial\/merge.py","diffId":"21564","author":"martinvonz","id":"128874","dateCreated":"1591883475","dateModified":"1591883475"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I am not sure why we gain all these new cases? where do they comes from?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"1916","lineLength":"5","path":"mercurial\/merge.py","diffId":"21564","author":"marmoute","id":"128870","dateCreated":"1591883145","dateModified":"1591883145"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21605","author":"martinvonz","id":"128857","dateCreated":"1591811649","dateModified":"1591811649"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8616#128712, @marmoute wrote:\n> This patch seems related to D8596 which @martinvonz pointed as \"not meant to be merged\". What should we do with this diff ? is it intended for landing ? If not could get we it out of need-review and marke it RFC ?\n\nThat was on an earlier version of the series; this series is now ready.","author":"martinvonz","id":"128752","dateCreated":"1591711917","dateModified":"1591711917"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This patch seems related to D8596 which @martinvonz pointed as \"not meant to be merged\". What should we do with this diff ? is it intended for landing ? If not could get we it out of need-review and marke it RFC ?","author":"marmoute","id":"128712","dateCreated":"1591699657","dateModified":"1591699657"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21564","author":"martinvonz","id":"128515","dateCreated":"1591407542","dateModified":"1591407542"}],"dateCreated":"1591407542","dateModified":"1594913281","status":"Changes Planned"},{"id":"8599","callsign":"HG","title":"rebase: remove now-unused arguments from rebasenode()","author":"martinvonz","summary":"`rebasenode()` is now finally as simple as I think it should be, and\nrebasing is now repeated grafting.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"14","dependsOn":["8598"],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["marmoute","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"Changes planned to earlier patch in the series","author":"martinvonz","id":"130850","dateCreated":"1594913080","dateModified":"1594913080"},{"type":"plan-changes","author":"martinvonz","id":"130849","dateCreated":"1594913080","dateModified":"1594913080"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"128863","dateCreated":"1591811948","dateModified":"1591811948"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8599#128724, @marmoute wrote:\n> This patch seems related to D8596 which @martinvonz pointed as \"not meant to be merged\". What should we do with this diff ? is it intended for landing ? If not could get we it out of need-review and marke it RFC ?\n\nThat was on an earlier version of the series; this series is now ready.","author":"martinvonz","id":"128755","dateCreated":"1591711962","dateModified":"1591711962"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This patch seems related to D8596 which @martinvonz pointed as \"not meant to be merged\". What should we do with this diff ? is it intended for landing ? If not could get we it out of need-review and marke it RFC ?","author":"marmoute","id":"128724","dateCreated":"1591699668","dateModified":"1591699668"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21567","author":"martinvonz","id":"128529","dateCreated":"1591407581","dateModified":"1591407581"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21528","author":"martinvonz","id":"128312","dateCreated":"1590767873","dateModified":"1590767873"}],"dateCreated":"1590767873","dateModified":"1594913080","status":"Changes Planned"},{"id":"8598","callsign":"HG","title":"rebase: drop duplicate call to copies.graftcopies()","author":"martinvonz","summary":"`merge.graft()` already calls it.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"8","dependsOn":["8597"],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["marmoute","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"Changes planned to earlier patch in the series","author":"martinvonz","id":"130848","dateCreated":"1594913069","dateModified":"1594913069"},{"type":"plan-changes","author":"martinvonz","id":"130847","dateCreated":"1594913069","dateModified":"1594913069"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"128862","dateCreated":"1591811886","dateModified":"1591811886"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8598#128720, @marmoute wrote:\n> This patch seems related to D8596 which @martinvonz pointed as \"not meant to be merged\". What should we do with this diff ? is it intended for landing ? If not could get we it out of need-review and marke it RFC ?\n\nThat was on an earlier version of the series; this series is now ready.","author":"martinvonz","id":"128754","dateCreated":"1591711949","dateModified":"1591711949"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This patch seems related to D8596 which @martinvonz pointed as \"not meant to be merged\". What should we do with this diff ? is it intended for landing ? If not could get we it out of need-review and marke it RFC ?","author":"marmoute","id":"128720","dateCreated":"1591699664","dateModified":"1591699664"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21566","author":"martinvonz","id":"128527","dateCreated":"1591407579","dateModified":"1591407579"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21527","author":"martinvonz","id":"128304","dateCreated":"1590767872","dateModified":"1590767872"}],"dateCreated":"1590767872","dateModified":"1594913069","status":"Changes Planned"},{"id":"8596","callsign":"HG","title":"merge: mark copies in in-memory context when merging","author":"martinvonz","summary":"Until now, `merge.update()` didn't mark copies in the\n`overlayworkingctx` (when using that). That's because we copies are\nrecorded in the `wctx` (whether that's a `workingctx` or a\n`overlayworkingctx`) in `recordupdates()`, which is not called when we\nshould not udpate the dirstate, which we should not do for in-memory\nupdates.\n\nWe had not noticed this before because rebase calls graftcopies\nafter. However, I think that using `merge.update()` with an in-memory\ncontext outside the context of rebase would lose copies.\n\nThis patch fixes the problem by first extracting the desired copies\nfrom the `action` map and then applying the changes outside of\n`recordupdates()` (and removing the copy-marking from that method).\n\nAn alternative solution would be to call `recordupdates()` also in the\nin-memory case by modifying it to call `wctx.drop()` etc (which don't\nyet exist), but that would mean that we would add a bunch of no-op\nmethods on `overlayworkingctx`, since that already knows which files\nare tracked.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"57","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["marmoute","durin42","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8596#130836, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>! In D8596#130831, @marmoute wrote:\n>> Can you mark them as \"changes planned\" in the mean time to clear up yadda?\n> \n> There are no actual changes planned and I guess I figured that the base patch being marked as \"changes planned\" would be sufficient, so sure, I'll update the other ones to that status too.\n\nMy main goal here is to prevent yadda to be over 50% of content to review that is actually not to review.","author":"marmoute","id":"130846","dateCreated":"1594913062","dateModified":"1594913062"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8596#130831, @marmoute wrote:\n> Can you mark them as \"changes planned\" in the mean time to clear up yadda?\n\nThere are no actual changes planned and I guess I figured that the base patch being marked as \"changes planned\" would be sufficient, so sure, I'll update the other ones to that status too.","author":"martinvonz","id":"130836","dateCreated":"1594912986","dateModified":"1594912986"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Can you mark them as \"changes planned\" in the mean time to clear up yadda?\n","author":"marmoute","id":"130831","dateCreated":"1594910086","dateModified":"1594910086"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8596#130671, @marmoute wrote:\n> What's the conclusion here ? I feel like we decided to move in the opposite direction\n\nYes, I agree that we should make `recordupdates()` also record copies. I'll update this patch to do that eventually :)\n\n> (and to drop this series).   Is that right ?\n\nMost if the series would still be unchanged, I think. I could drop this patch and replace it by another patch, but I could also reuse the Phabricator review for the new purpose. Doesn't matter much to me.","author":"martinvonz","id":"130686","dateCreated":"1594830058","dateModified":"1594830058"},{"type":"comment","comment":"What's the conclusion here ? I feel like we decided to move in the opposite direction (and to drop this series).   Is that right ?","author":"marmoute","id":"130671","dateCreated":"1594829778","dateModified":"1594829778"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Yes, I was also feeling that more and more. We should probably replicate many dirstate methods on workingctx and its subclasses.","replyTo":"128913","isNewFile":"1","line":"766","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/mergestate.py","diffId":"21560","author":"martinvonz","id":"128916","dateCreated":"1591897642","dateModified":"1591897642"},{"type":"plan-changes","author":"martinvonz","id":"128914","dateCreated":"1591897642","dateModified":"1591897642"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Okay, then it feel like we are going the in wrong direction and breaking the API contract here. For example, why is only part of record update move to apply update ? Does this impact our ability to execute applyupdates in parallel ? etc.\n\nIt would seems much cleaner to call recordupdates on all ctx types, don't it?","replyTo":"128879","isNewFile":"1","line":"766","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/mergestate.py","diffId":"21560","author":"marmoute","id":"128913","dateCreated":"1591897156","dateModified":"1591897156"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Yes, that is correct about their roles. See commit message for my reasoning.","replyTo":"128872","isNewFile":"1","line":"766","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/mergestate.py","diffId":"21560","author":"martinvonz","id":"128879","dateCreated":"1591886113","dateModified":"1591886113"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Good question!  I've added a comment.","replyTo":"128871","isNewFile":"1","line":"1891","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/merge.py","diffId":"21560","author":"martinvonz","id":"128878","dateCreated":"1591886113","dateModified":"1591886113"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21607","author":"martinvonz","id":"128875","dateCreated":"1591886050","dateModified":"1591886050"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Okay, so why do we have both a `applyupdates` and `recordupdates` function ? What are their respective resonsability and why is it split ?\n\nIs it that `apply` is only responsible for touching the disk content and `record` to only update internal metadata like the dirstate ? If so, moving the copies recording out of recordupdates seems wrong. ","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"766","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/mergestate.py","diffId":"21560","author":"marmoute","id":"128872","dateCreated":"1591883159","dateModified":"1591883159"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Actually, thinking more about it, I still don't know why we should overlook rename information when overwriting. Can you clarify that point  in a comment ?","replyTo":"128864","isNewFile":"1","line":"1891","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/merge.py","diffId":"21560","author":"marmoute","id":"128871","dateCreated":"1591883159","dateModified":"1591883159"},{"type":"inline","comment":"no, phabricator diffing made me think we were in the following function, that takes it as an argument:\n\n```\ndef applyupdates(\n    repo, actions, wctx, mctx, overwrite, wantfiledata, labels=None\n):\n```","replyTo":"128859","isNewFile":"1","line":"1891","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/merge.py","diffId":"21560","author":"marmoute","id":"128864","dateCreated":"1591812212","dateModified":"1591812212"},{"type":"inline","comment":"It's defined on line 1631 and used a few times thereafter. Would you like a comment in each place it's used? I can add that in a separate patch. I don't know think there's a relevant docstring to update.","replyTo":"128848","isNewFile":"1","line":"1891","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/merge.py","diffId":"21560","author":"martinvonz","id":"128859","dateCreated":"1591811656","dateModified":"1591811656"},{"type":"inline","comment":"> I don't understand this docstring. From what I see of the code, it mostly pull things from an actions dictionnary to put them in a copies dictionnary. That does not seems to involves the dirstates nor any \"recording\". Am I missing something ?\n\nI suspect that all you're missing is https:\/\/www.mercurial-scm.org\/repo\/hg\/file\/61719b9658b1\/mercurial\/mergestate.py#l758 (or maybe you just didn't infer that this was a bad copy from there) :) Fixed.\n\n","replyTo":"128847","isNewFile":"1","line":"1170","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/merge.py","diffId":"21560","author":"martinvonz","id":"128858","dateCreated":"1591811656","dateModified":"1591811656"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21603","author":"martinvonz","id":"128854","dateCreated":"1591811647","dateModified":"1591811647"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I don't know what `overwrite` means and the docstring does not mention it. Can you clarify this and fix the docstring ?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"1891","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/merge.py","diffId":"21560","author":"marmoute","id":"128848","dateCreated":"1591810809","dateModified":"1591810809"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I don't understand this docstring. From what I see of the code, it mostly pull things from an actions dictionnary to put them in a copies dictionnary. That does not seems to involves the dirstates nor any \"recording\". Am I missing something ?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"1170","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/merge.py","diffId":"21560","author":"marmoute","id":"128847","dateCreated":"1591810809","dateModified":"1591810809"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I have a bunch a questions.","author":"marmoute","id":"128846","dateCreated":"1591810809","dateModified":"1591810809"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8596#128758, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>! In D8596#128750, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>>! In D8596#128704, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>>>! In D8596#128319, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>> This is not meant for review; I'm sending it now in case it'll be useful for @durin42's work on merge-diffs. I also included the rest of the stack to explain why I wrote the code.\n>>> \n>>> Can you add a RFC tag to this then ?\n>> \n>> I had marked it \"Changes Planned\" but I've fixed the issues and the version I uploaded a day or two ago is ready for review .\n> \n> Okay, (It would help if you reply to your own comment to state this clearly, which you now did)\n\nYep, I definitely should have. Sorry that I didn't think of doing that.\n","author":"martinvonz","id":"128759","dateCreated":"1591718787","dateModified":"1591718787"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8596#128750, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>! In D8596#128704, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>>! In D8596#128319, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>> This is not meant for review; I'm sending it now in case it'll be useful for @durin42's work on merge-diffs. I also included the rest of the stack to explain why I wrote the code.\n>> \n>> Can you add a RFC tag to this then ?\n> \n> I had marked it \"Changes Planned\" but I've fixed the issues and the version I uploaded a day or two ago is ready for review .\n\nOkay, (It would help if you reply to your own comment to state this clearly, which you now did)","author":"marmoute","id":"128758","dateCreated":"1591717689","dateModified":"1591717727"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8596#128704, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>! In D8596#128319, @martinvonz wrote:\n>> This is not meant for review; I'm sending it now in case it'll be useful for @durin42's work on merge-diffs. I also included the rest of the stack to explain why I wrote the code.\n> \n> Can you add a RFC tag to this then ?\n\nI had marked it \"Changes Planned\" but I've fixed the issues and the version I uploaded a day or two ago is ready for review .","author":"martinvonz","id":"128750","dateCreated":"1591711464","dateModified":"1591711464"},{"type":"request-review","author":"martinvonz","id":"128748","dateCreated":"1591711464","dateModified":"1591711464"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8596#128319, @martinvonz wrote:\n> This is not meant for review; I'm sending it now in case it'll be useful for @durin42's work on merge-diffs. I also included the rest of the stack to explain why I wrote the code.\n\nCan you add a RFC tag to this then ?","author":"marmoute","id":"128704","dateCreated":"1591699544","dateModified":"1591699544"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"128703","dateCreated":"1591699544","dateModified":"1591699544"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21560","author":"martinvonz","id":"128497","dateCreated":"1591407457","dateModified":"1591407457"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This is not meant for review; I'm sending it now in case it'll be useful for @durin42's work on merge-diffs. I also included the rest of the stack to explain why I wrote the code.","author":"martinvonz","id":"128320","dateCreated":"1590768016","dateModified":"1590768016"},{"type":"plan-changes","author":"martinvonz","id":"128318","dateCreated":"1590768016","dateModified":"1590768016"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21525","author":"martinvonz","id":"128289","dateCreated":"1590767870","dateModified":"1590767870"}],"dateCreated":"1590767870","dateModified":"1594913062","status":"Changes Planned"},{"id":"8597","callsign":"HG","title":"rebase: use merge.graft() instead of merge.update()","author":"martinvonz","summary":"It's been possible to call `merge.graft()` here for a while (I don't\nremember which of my previous changes made it possible), but it would\nhave meant that we did a redundant `graftcopies()` call. With the fix\nto make `merge.update()` record copies in the overlayworkingctx (when\nusing that), we can now also remove the redundant `graftcopies()`\ncall. The next patch will do that.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"14","dependsOn":["8616"],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["marmoute","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"Changes planned to earlier patch in the series","author":"martinvonz","id":"130845","dateCreated":"1594913055","dateModified":"1594913055"},{"type":"plan-changes","author":"martinvonz","id":"130844","dateCreated":"1594913055","dateModified":"1594913055"},{"type":"reclaim","author":"martinvonz","id":"130843","dateCreated":"1594913047","dateModified":"1594913047"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Changes planned to earlier patch in the series","author":"martinvonz","id":"130842","dateCreated":"1594913039","dateModified":"1594913039"},{"type":"abandon","author":"martinvonz","id":"130841","dateCreated":"1594913039","dateModified":"1594913039"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Great.","author":"marmoute","id":"128861","dateCreated":"1591811694","dateModified":"1591811694"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"128860","dateCreated":"1591811694","dateModified":"1591811694"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8597#128716, @marmoute wrote:\n> This patch seems related to D8596 which @martinvonz pointed as \"not meant to be merged\". What should we do with this diff ? is it intended for landing ? If not could get we it out of need-review and marke it RFC ?\n\nThat was on an earlier version of the series; this series is now ready.","author":"martinvonz","id":"128753","dateCreated":"1591711931","dateModified":"1591711931"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This patch seems related to D8596 which @martinvonz pointed as \"not meant to be merged\". What should we do with this diff ? is it intended for landing ? If not could get we it out of need-review and marke it RFC ?","author":"marmoute","id":"128716","dateCreated":"1591699660","dateModified":"1591699660"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21565","author":"martinvonz","id":"128522","dateCreated":"1591407577","dateModified":"1591407577"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21526","author":"martinvonz","id":"128297","dateCreated":"1590767871","dateModified":"1590767871"}],"dateCreated":"1590767871","dateModified":"1594913055","status":"Changes Planned"},{"id":"8595","callsign":"HG","title":"copies: make _chain() and _filter() public","author":"martinvonz","summary":"The next patch will add a call to chain(). I made _filter() public\njust for consistency.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"18","dependsOn":["8596"],"reviewers":["indygreg"],"ccs":["marmoute","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"Changes planned to earlier patch in the series","author":"martinvonz","id":"130838","dateCreated":"1594913019","dateModified":"1594913019"},{"type":"plan-changes","author":"martinvonz","id":"130837","dateCreated":"1594913019","dateModified":"1594913019"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21604","author":"martinvonz","id":"128856","dateCreated":"1591811648","dateModified":"1591811648"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8595#128708, @marmoute wrote:\n> This patch seems related to D8596 which @martinvonz pointed as \"not meant to be merged\". What should we do with this diff ? is it intended for landing ? If not could get we it out of need-review and marke it RFC ?\n\nThat was on an earlier version of the series; this series is now ready.","author":"martinvonz","id":"128751","dateCreated":"1591711898","dateModified":"1591711898"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This patch seems related to D8596 which @martinvonz pointed as \"not meant to be merged\". What should we do with this diff ? is it intended for landing ? If not could get we it out of need-review and marke it RFC ?","author":"marmoute","id":"128708","dateCreated":"1591699645","dateModified":"1591699645"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21561","author":"martinvonz","id":"128502","dateCreated":"1591407458","dateModified":"1591407458"},{"type":"accept","author":"indygreg","id":"128346","dateCreated":"1590855643","dateModified":"1590855643"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21524","author":"martinvonz","id":"128284","dateCreated":"1590767868","dateModified":"1590767868"}],"dateCreated":"1590767868","dateModified":"1594913019","status":"Changes Planned"},{"id":"6876","callsign":"HG","title":"phabricator: support automatically obsoleting old revisions of pulled commits","author":"mharbison72","summary":"This is basically an import of the `pullcreatemarkers` extension[1] from the FB\nrepo, with minor adjustments to `getmatchingdiff()` to work with modern hg.\nSince this is very phabricator specific, it makes more sense to me to bundle it\ninto the existing extension.  It wasn't very obvious from the old name what\nfunctionality was provided, and it may make sense to do this in other scenarios\nbesides `hg pull`.\n\nThere are two use cases that I can see- first, ensuring that old revisions are\ncleaned up for a contributor (I seem to recall something I submitted recently\nneeded to be explicitly pruned, though most submissions do clean up\nautomatically).  Second, any `hg phabread | hg import -` would otherwise need to\nbe manually cleaned up.  The latter is annoying enough that I tend not to grab\nthe code and try it when reviewing.\n\nIt is currently guarded by a config option (off by default), because @marmoute\nexpressed concerns about duplicate marker creation if the pushing reviewer also\ncreates a marker.  I don't think that's possible here, since the obsolete\nrevisions are explicitly excluded.  But maybe there are other reasons someone\nwouldn't want older revisions obsoleted.  The config name reflects the fact that\nI'm not sure if other things like import should get this too.\n\nI suspect that we could wrap a function deeper in the pull sequence to improve\nboth the code and the UX.  For example, when pulling an obsolete marker, it can\nprint out a warning that the working directory parent is obsolete, but that\ndoesn't happen here.  (It won't happen with this test.  It *should* without the\n`--bypass` option, but doesn't.)  It should also be possible to not have to\nquery the range of new revisions, and maybe it can be added to the existing\ntransaction.\n\n[1] https:\/\/bitbucket.org\/facebook\/hg-experimental\/src\/default\/hgext3rd\/pullcreatemarkers.py","testPlan":"","lineCount":"69","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","pulkit","sheehan","Kwan","mercurial-devel","marmoute"],"actions":[{"type":"plan-changes","author":"mharbison72","id":"130697","dateCreated":"1594833808","dateModified":"1594833808"},{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117510","dateCreated":"1579887103","dateModified":"1579887103"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117509","dateCreated":"1579887103","dateModified":"1579887103"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Right, and this is probably the typical case. (The `phabimport` alias I have imports as secret to prevent accidental push.)  But secret is visible to the user, and benefits from the cleanup.  Archived isn\u2019t visible (IIUC), so it probably doesn\u2019t need to be obsoleted too- especially if we\u2019re worried about marker growth.\n\n(I\u2019m also not sure how well thg handles archived, and that probably needs to be squared away first if we opt to archive instead of obsolete here.)","replyTo":"102970","isNewFile":"1","line":"216","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/phabricator.py","diffId":"16604","author":"mharbison72","id":"102982","dateCreated":"1570536765","dateModified":"1570536765"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I see. So maybe this should only obsolete things that have no precursors, and warn (and ignore) things that do.  That means it doesn\u2019t clean up if the reviewer accidentally forgets to import with `\u2014obsolete`, but that\u2019s easy enough to fix with a copy\/paste command if A and A' are identified in the output.","replyTo":"102971","isNewFile":"1","line":"187","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/phabricator.py","diffId":"16604","author":"mharbison72","id":"102981","dateCreated":"1570536765","dateModified":"1570536765"},{"type":"inline","comment":"User  A phasend a patch\n\n  - User A phasend a changeset `A` as D1337\n  - User B phabimport D1337, rebase (as `A'`) and pushes\n  - User A fix critical bug in D1337 and amend it as `A''`\n  - User A pull the **old** version of D1337 without the fix.\n\nIf we obsolete the **new** version of D1337 (`A''`), we are silently dropping the fix to the critical bug.\n\nIf markers were properly exchange, the evolution machinery would detect the divergence, warn the user and be able to automatically solve it. Preserving the fix to the criticial bug.\n\n","replyTo":"102947","isNewFile":"1","line":"187","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/phabricator.py","diffId":"16604","author":"marmoute","id":"102971","dateCreated":"1570529823","dateModified":"1570529823"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Thing could be in `secret` phase too.","replyTo":"102944","isNewFile":"1","line":"216","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/phabricator.py","diffId":"16604","author":"marmoute","id":"102970","dateCreated":"1570529823","dateModified":"1570529823"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I do mean **after** locking (sorry)","replyTo":"102945","isNewFile":"1","line":"225","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/phabricator.py","diffId":"16604","author":"marmoute","id":"102969","dateCreated":"1570529823","dateModified":"1570529823"},{"type":"inline","comment":"It looks like, based on the loop where it's used, it will obsolete \/\/all\/\/ (non public) commits that match.  The only way I can think of where that happens is if I `phabimport` someone else's patches, they make updates, and then I `phabimport` again.  That's why I was wondering aloud about doing this on import, but if the eventual pull cleans it all up, that may be sufficient for the use case I had in mind.  I don't see how a developer would do that on their own commits with amend and friends.\n\nDo you have any ideas to detect phase divergence?  And can that even happen if we're ignoring public commits?","replyTo":"102927","isNewFile":"1","line":"187","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/phabricator.py","diffId":"16604","author":"mharbison72","id":"102947","dateCreated":"1570508435","dateModified":"1570508435"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I wonder if it would be better in some txn hook.  And then it could (I think) share the existing transaction and lock.","replyTo":"102929","isNewFile":"1","line":"192","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/phabricator.py","diffId":"16604","author":"mharbison72","id":"102946","dateCreated":"1570508435","dateModified":"1570508435"},{"type":"inline","comment":"You mean \/\/after\/\/ locking, correct?","replyTo":"102928","isNewFile":"1","line":"225","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/phabricator.py","diffId":"16604","author":"mharbison72","id":"102945","dateCreated":"1570508435","dateModified":"1570508435"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Agreed.\n\nI saw mention of the archived phase the other day; how would that (and other special phases) play here?","replyTo":"102926","isNewFile":"1","line":"216","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/phabricator.py","diffId":"16604","author":"mharbison72","id":"102944","dateCreated":"1570508435","dateModified":"1570508435"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6876#102925, @marmoute wrote:\n> The feature seens pretty usful, but is also a potential foot-gun\/data-loss engine. I think it is useful to take the feature, but maybe with proper documentaiton warning and turned of by efaut. I made a couple of comment about the implementation.\n\nI basically agree with the inline comments.  This was an import with minimal changes as a baseline, and I didn't want to spend time making a bunch of follow ups until I gauged interest in this.\n\nAlternately, if there's concern over obsolete marker growth, should this use the archived phase instead?  Since the use case is mostly around stuff a developer imports locally, I don't see much value in those markers being exchangeable.  The only potential hole I see is if someone has pushed this to a non publishing repo before pulling.  Then everyone else could pull the (not obsoleted) commit.  But then \/\/they\/\/ would archive it on pull too, instead of N developers potentially creating N markers for the same commit.","author":"mharbison72","id":"102943","dateCreated":"1570508435","dateModified":"1570508435"},{"type":"inline","comment":"It would probably make sense to wrap the pull exchange logic instead. It would catch more instance and could reuse the same transaction.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"192","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/phabricator.py","diffId":"16604","author":"marmoute","id":"102929","dateCreated":"1570495381","dateModified":"1570495381"},{"type":"inline","comment":"We should do the computation before locking to avoid other process updating the repo under our feet.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"225","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/phabricator.py","diffId":"16604","author":"marmoute","id":"102928","dateCreated":"1570495381","dateModified":"1570495381"},{"type":"inline","comment":"So, this only checks the diff number, right ? So in theory, we could obsolete a later version of this, silently dropping change (instead of detecting potential phase-divergence)","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"187","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/phabricator.py","diffId":"16604","author":"marmoute","id":"102927","dateCreated":"1570495381","dateModified":"1570495381"},{"type":"inline","comment":"This should be `non public()` instead of `draft()` these could be draft.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"216","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/phabricator.py","diffId":"16604","author":"marmoute","id":"102926","dateCreated":"1570495381","dateModified":"1570495381"},{"type":"comment","comment":"The feature seens pretty usful, but is also a potential foot-gun\/data-loss engine. I think it is useful to take the feature, but maybe with proper documentaiton warning and turned of by efaut. I made a couple of comment about the implementation.","author":"marmoute","id":"102925","dateCreated":"1570495381","dateModified":"1570495381"},{"type":"comment","comment":"@sheehan this might be of interest to you.","author":"pulkit","id":"102116","dateCreated":"1570282533","dateModified":"1570282533"},{"type":"update","diffId":"16604","author":"mharbison72","id":"100947","dateCreated":"1569388644","dateModified":"1569388644"}],"dateCreated":"1569388644","dateModified":"1594833808","status":"Changes Planned"},{"id":"7575","callsign":"HG","title":"hg-core: vendor Facebook's configparser crate","author":"indygreg","summary":"I added a number of files from https:\/\/github.com\/facebookexperimental\/eden\nat commit b745b4421b8a8b130d2094b598cedf65655410ec. Files are unmodified from\ntheir original versions. However, the paths are different: I've put all\nfiles in the same directory. And I've removed some files we don't care about\n(such as the C++ bindings and CMake rules). Notably missing is the\nauto-generated parser.rs and the Python script to generate it. We will\nbe able to generate this file automatically at build time (unlike\nFacebook, which is constrained by not using Cargo or something).\n\nThe added files are not part of the hg-core project yet. Things will be\nincorporated in future commits.\n\nI haven't extensively audited the added code for functional correctness\nand compatibility. But I did skim it and it seems to be a highly compatible\nconfig parsing implementation. The most suspect code I found was around\nconfig file path handling. There are references to \"tupperware,\" which\nappears to be a Facebook-specific thing. We will want to clean this up\nat some point...","testPlan":"","lineCount":"2319","dependsOn":["7574"],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","marmoute","pulkit","Alphare","quark","durin42","kevincox","mjpieters","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"130683","dateCreated":"1594830054","dateModified":"1594830054"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"130682","dateCreated":"1594830054","dateModified":"1594830054"},{"type":"comment","comment":"@Alphare What's your current opinion on this diff, can you mark it accepted or request change appropriatly ?","author":"marmoute","id":"124050","dateCreated":"1584659140","dateModified":"1584659140"},{"type":"comment","comment":"The C bindings need to be dropped in this patch. Queued the previous patches, many thanks for importing things!","author":"pulkit","id":"115312","dateCreated":"1578933475","dateModified":"1578933475"},{"type":"inline","comment":"+1, I'm not sure what the use case for this would be in core.","replyTo":"111444","isNewFile":"1","line":"1","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hg-core\/src\/configparser\/c_api.rs","diffId":"18545","author":"durin42","id":"111896","dateCreated":"1576086289","dateModified":"1576086289"},{"type":"inline","comment":"My bad, it looks like you took care of it in a future patch.","replyTo":"111445","isNewFile":"1","line":"226","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hg-core\/src\/configparser\/hg.rs","diffId":"18545","author":"Alphare","id":"111457","dateCreated":"1575896534","dateModified":"1575896534"},{"type":"inline","comment":"`pest` is really cool.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"63","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hg-core\/src\/configparser\/spec.pest","diffId":"18545","author":"Alphare","id":"111449","dateCreated":"1575891512","dateModified":"1575891512"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Is this hack still needed as of `1.34.2`?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"595","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hg-core\/src\/configparser\/hg.rs","diffId":"18545","author":"Alphare","id":"111448","dateCreated":"1575891512","dateModified":"1575891512"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Our current strategy is to assume config files to be in local encoding, not UTF-8. This makes sense from Facebook's perspective, but now as an upstream solution (see previous work on `HgPath`).","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"413","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hg-core\/src\/configparser\/hg.rs","diffId":"18545","author":"Alphare","id":"111447","dateCreated":"1575891512","dateModified":"1575891512"},{"type":"inline","comment":"+1","replyTo":"111406","isNewFile":"1","line":"262","lineLength":"1","path":"rust\/hg-core\/src\/configparser\/hg.rs","diffId":"18535","author":"Alphare","id":"111446","dateCreated":"1575891512","dateModified":"1575891512"},{"type":"inline","comment":"This function looks very Facebook specific, I don't think we want to include it at all.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"226","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hg-core\/src\/configparser\/hg.rs","diffId":"18545","author":"Alphare","id":"111445","dateCreated":"1575891512","dateModified":"1575891512"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Do we need bindings to C ? I don't see what the use-case is at this stage of the Rust development.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"1","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hg-core\/src\/configparser\/c_api.rs","diffId":"18545","author":"Alphare","id":"111444","dateCreated":"1575891512","dateModified":"1575891512"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18545","author":"indygreg","id":"111411","dateCreated":"1575774205","dateModified":"1575774205"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Thank you for the feedback, @quark! You enlightened me to a few issues I missed during my very quick perusal.\n\nI agree that doing away with the auto-generated `parser.rs` feels like a better solution. I may revise this series yet again...","author":"indygreg","id":"111408","dateCreated":"1575760222","dateModified":"1575760222"},{"type":"inline","comment":"You might want to revert D13875655 for the directory include feature, which has some test changes.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"72","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hg-core\/src\/configparser\/config.rs","diffId":"18535","author":"quark","id":"111407","dateCreated":"1575760006","dateModified":"1575760006"},{"type":"inline","comment":"You might want to respect `$PAGER`. We ignored it to reduce support burden for mis-configuration. ","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"262","lineLength":"1","path":"rust\/hg-core\/src\/configparser\/hg.rs","diffId":"18535","author":"quark","id":"111406","dateCreated":"1575760006","dateModified":"1575760006"},{"type":"inline","comment":"You might want to remove these lines.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"141","lineLength":"3","path":"rust\/hg-core\/src\/configparser\/hg.rs","diffId":"18535","author":"quark","id":"111405","dateCreated":"1575760006","dateModified":"1575760006"},{"type":"inline","comment":"You might want to follow this and remove the generated code.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"103","lineLength":"4","path":"rust\/hg-core\/src\/configparser\/generate_parser.py","diffId":"18535","author":"quark","id":"111404","dateCreated":"1575760006","dateModified":"1575760006"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18535","author":"indygreg","id":"111333","dateCreated":"1575749870","dateModified":"1575749870"}],"dateCreated":"1575749870","dateModified":"1594830054","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"7576","callsign":"HG","title":"hg-core: add configparser to library","author":"indygreg","summary":"This commit contains all the changes to the recently-imported\nRust code to make it work with our Rust library and pass our\nlinting tests.\n\nWe rename lib.rs to mod.rs to reflect it being a sub-module instead\nof a full library. We add this module to our lib.rs. We add various\npackage dependencies to Cargo.toml. We make a handful of Rust code\nupdates to reflect the new symbol locations. Finally, we add a\nparser.rs containing the boilerplate for generating a config file\nparser from the spec.pest file.\n\nAs part of adding the dependencies, some versions changed slightly\nfrom the upstream Cargo.toml, as we already had referenced a more\nmodern crate version.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"305","dependsOn":["7582"],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","marmoute","Alphare","durin42","kevincox","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"130679","dateCreated":"1594830053","dateModified":"1594830053"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"130678","dateCreated":"1594830053","dateModified":"1594830053"},{"type":"comment","comment":"@Alphare What's your current opinion on this diff, can you mark it accepted or request change appropriately ?","author":"marmoute","id":"124052","dateCreated":"1584659236","dateModified":"1584659236"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I'm a little lost on the state of this. It looks like we need to downgrade the required Rust version?","author":"durin42","id":"114846","dateCreated":"1578513514","dateModified":"1578513514"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I know it doesn't matter at all, but the timing of this issue is just too funny not to share: https:\/\/github.com\/tokio-rs\/bytes\/issues\/340","replyTo":"111969","isNewFile":"1","line":"14","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hg-core\/Cargo.toml","diffId":"18547","author":"Alphare","id":"112098","dateCreated":"1576180674","dateModified":"1576180674"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I wonder about this dependency. It uses 4 `usize` for every slice of bytes, and adds some overhead, albeit minimal, that I am trying to justify.\nAre we looking at reaping the benefits down the line? The crate itself is good quality, maintained by the Tokio people, so I'm not *too* worried about it being pre-1.0, but do we need this? ","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"14","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hg-core\/Cargo.toml","diffId":"18547","author":"Alphare","id":"111969","dateCreated":"1576140492","dateModified":"1576140492"},{"type":"inline","comment":"\"The current minimum required Rust version is 1.36\". This disqualifies this crate from being used in `hg-core` right now. Good news is that it is supposed to offer improvements over existing `std` types like `Mutex` and the like, so it's nothing that would be hard to replace. \n\nAlso, I've seen complaints online about the lack of benchmarks of `parking_lot` against `std` types to back-up their claims for performance. I have not looked into it myself.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"19","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hg-core\/Cargo.toml","diffId":"18547","author":"Alphare","id":"111455","dateCreated":"1575896446","dateModified":"1575896446"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18547","author":"indygreg","id":"111419","dateCreated":"1575774207","dateModified":"1575774207"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18541","author":"indygreg","id":"111381","dateCreated":"1575759414","dateModified":"1575759414"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18536","author":"indygreg","id":"111341","dateCreated":"1575749872","dateModified":"1575749872"}],"dateCreated":"1575749872","dateModified":"1594830053","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8574","callsign":"HG","title":"hooks: teach reject_new_heads about phase transitions","author":"joerg.sonnenberger","summary":"","testPlan":"","lineCount":"73","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["marmoute","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"This hooks feel like a duplication of the `experimental.experimental', b'single-head-per-branch` config and I would rather see the experimental feature boosted with what might be missing than increasing the divergent duplication.","author":"marmoute","id":"130674","dateCreated":"1594829866","dateModified":"1594829866"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"130673","dateCreated":"1594829865","dateModified":"1594829865"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21461","author":"joerg.sonnenberger","id":"127963","dateCreated":"1590076395","dateModified":"1590076395"}],"dateCreated":"1590076395","dateModified":"1594829866","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8680","callsign":"HG","title":"rhg: fix test-rhg.t code style","author":"acezar","summary":"","testPlan":"","lineCount":"2","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["marmoute","pulkit"],"ccs":["durin42","marmoute","pulkit","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"Seems to need rebased?","author":"durin42","id":"130607","dateCreated":"1594829197","dateModified":"1594829197"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Folding it into a097299ed2a0.","author":"pulkit","id":"129685","dateCreated":"1594110806","dateModified":"1594110806"},{"type":"accept","author":"pulkit","id":"129683","dateCreated":"1594110806","dateModified":"1594110806"},{"type":"comment","comment":"That one fix some test failure we currently have on default (cc @pulkit )","author":"marmoute","id":"129658","dateCreated":"1594032348","dateModified":"1594032348"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"129657","dateCreated":"1594032348","dateModified":"1594032348"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21764","author":"acezar","id":"129628","dateCreated":"1594027081","dateModified":"1594027081"}],"dateCreated":"1594027081","dateModified":"1594829197","status":"Accepted"},{"id":"8693","callsign":"HG","title":"sidedata: test changes for incoming and local changes [POC]","author":"joerg.sonnenberger","summary":"Fixes wireproto v2 to not send the raw data with flags=0","testPlan":"","lineCount":"116","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":[],"ccs":["mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"update","diffId":"21787","author":"joerg.sonnenberger","id":"129768","dateCreated":"1594130053","dateModified":"1594130053"}],"dateCreated":"1594130053","dateModified":"1594130053","status":"Needs Review"},{"id":"8677","callsign":"HG","title":"heptapod: use basename of tests in skiplist in CI (issue6351)","author":"pulkit","summary":"In heptapod CI we create a skiplist of test-check* and don't want to run in\nother test suites as we have specific test suite for checks. However the\nskiplist was not working fine because we were putting test names in form of\n`tests\/test-check*` in it which does not work with our test runner.\n\nWe get the basename of the file and then put it in skiplist.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"2","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":[],"ccs":["mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"plan-changes","author":"pulkit","id":"129612","dateCreated":"1593771992","dateModified":"1593771992"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21761","author":"pulkit","id":"129607","dateCreated":"1593771898","dateModified":"1593771898"}],"dateCreated":"1593771898","dateModified":"1593771992","status":"Changes Planned"},{"id":"8648","callsign":"HG","title":"[rhg] format code","author":"acezar","summary":"Bad formating breaks tests\/test-check-rust-format.t","testPlan":"","lineCount":"1","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["pulkit","Alphare"],"ccs":["Alphare","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"(I know this is a misfire, but just so that this isn't taken by a committed)\nThe title is invalid ","author":"Alphare","id":"129211","dateCreated":"1592819392","dateModified":"1592819392"},{"type":"reject","author":"Alphare","id":"129210","dateCreated":"1592819392","dateModified":"1592819392"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Folding this into D8611.","author":"pulkit","id":"129207","dateCreated":"1592819356","dateModified":"1592819356"},{"type":"accept","author":"pulkit","id":"129204","dateCreated":"1592819334","dateModified":"1592819334"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21678","author":"acezar","id":"129199","dateCreated":"1592819118","dateModified":"1592819118"}],"dateCreated":"1592819118","dateModified":"1592821267","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"7786","callsign":"HG","title":"update: add --abort option in hg update command (issue4404)","author":"khanchi97","summary":"Here is, what --abort option is basically doing:\n1) hg resolve --unmark, then\n2) hg resolve --all --tool :local\n3) hg up <original ctx> --tool :local\n\nWhere,\nstep 1) is to mark all the files conflicted as unresolved (marking *all*\nfiles to make sure that it also mark the files which might have been\nresolved by user in meantime)\n\nstep 2) resolve all the conflicting files using `--tool :local`\n\nstep 3) update to the revision where it was checkedout before running the\nhg update, using `--tool :local`\n\nUse of `--tool :local` while updating to old revision (step3) make sure that\nit will not hit merge conflict at the time of update. And since we are using\nthe same tool (:local) as we used at the time of resolution (step2) it makes\nsure that we have exact changes in working directory as it was before IIUC.\n\nAdded tests demonstrate the behaviour of new flag.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"97","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["mharbison72"],"ccs":["mharbison72","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"This looks like a respin of D6735.  Can you take a look at my comments in there about subrepos, and incorporate the appropriate tests?  (I also didn't side by side compare the existing tests, so I'm not sure if there are things tested in that revision that aren't tested here.)","author":"mharbison72","id":"114439","dateCreated":"1578121196","dateModified":"1578121196"},{"type":"reject","author":"mharbison72","id":"114437","dateCreated":"1578121196","dateModified":"1578121196"},{"type":"update","diffId":"19034","author":"khanchi97","id":"114431","dateCreated":"1578063940","dateModified":"1578063940"}],"dateCreated":"1578063940","dateModified":"1592806928","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"6735","callsign":"HG","title":"update: added support for --abort flag(issue4404)","author":"taapas1128","summary":"This patch adds functionality to abort a conflicted\nupdate. A new function `hg.abortupdate()` is added for\nthe purpose which has a helper function\n`hg._unmarkandresolvelocal()` which deals with the\nconflicts occured.\n\nResults are shown in tests.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"210","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["durin42","mharbison72"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","joerg.sonnenberger","khanchi97","durin42","mharbison72","pulkit","mjpieters","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6735#123875, @khanchi97 wrote:\n>>>! In D6735#100642, @mharbison72 wrote:\n>> Here's a case I stumbled upon that is a problem.  It looks like it thinks it isn't in the middle of an update, but .hgsubstate isn't put back to the pre-update state.\n>> \n>> ```\n>> diff --git a\/tests\/test-subrepo.t b\/tests\/test-subrepo.t\n>> --- a\/tests\/test-subrepo.t\n>> +++ b\/tests\/test-subrepo.t\n>> @@ -1027,10 +1027,38 @@ filesystem (see also issue4583))\n>>    > [extensions]\n>>    > fakedirstatewritetime = $TESTDIR\/fakedirstatewritetime.py\n>>    > EOF\n>> +  $ hg -R repo st -S\n>> +  ? s\/b\n>> +  $ hg -R repo diff -S\n>> +  $ hg -R repo log -r .\n>> +  changeset:   0:c4018e9aea1b\n>> +  user:        test\n>> +  date:        Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000\n>> +  summary:     1\n>> +\n>> +  $ cat repo\/.hgsubstate\n>> +  f7b1eb17ad24730a1651fccd46c43826d1bbc2ac s\n>>    $ hg -R repo update\n>>    b: untracked file differs\n>>    abort: untracked files in working directory differ from files in requested revision (in subrepository \"s\")\n> @mharbison72 I am bit confused here.\n> 1) Since `hg -R repo update` resulted with an abort then why we have dirty working directory now? Isn't transaction rollback worked correctly?\n\nTwo things to keep in mind.\n1) updates aren't transactions\n2) even if they were, a transaction is within *one* repo.\n\nWhen you update with subrepos, you check for dirty from the top, recurse to the bottom, and on the way up you update the subrepo.  So in the simple case of parent repo P and subrepo S, you check P for dirty (recursively), then update S, then update P.  If something goes wrong updating P, S is not rolled back.\n\n> 2) Also if you run `hg status` it says \"To continue: run `hg update .`\" but I don't think it's really a \"continue\", since we are still on the same changeset where we ran the first update command and running `hg update .` won't take us to the changeset we wanted to go.\n\nMaybe it needs to continue if it did a partial checkout?  IDK when the parent in dirstate is updated- before or after all files are checked out.\n\n> 3) I found that for interrupted update (only for some particular kind of interrupted update) we store target node value in `.hg\/updatestate` but I couldn't find where we exactly use that value. I found some code which check if that file exists but not one where we use the value stored in that file.\n\nSorry, I'm not sure about that either.  I'd imagine it's for the --continue case though.  Maybe that isn't fully implemented yet?","author":"mharbison72","id":"123876","dateCreated":"1584398748","dateModified":"1584398748"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6735#100642, @mharbison72 wrote:\n> Here's a case I stumbled upon that is a problem.  It looks like it thinks it isn't in the middle of an update, but .hgsubstate isn't put back to the pre-update state.\n> \n> ```\n> diff --git a\/tests\/test-subrepo.t b\/tests\/test-subrepo.t\n> --- a\/tests\/test-subrepo.t\n> +++ b\/tests\/test-subrepo.t\n> @@ -1027,10 +1027,38 @@ filesystem (see also issue4583))\n>    > [extensions]\n>    > fakedirstatewritetime = $TESTDIR\/fakedirstatewritetime.py\n>    > EOF\n> +  $ hg -R repo st -S\n> +  ? s\/b\n> +  $ hg -R repo diff -S\n> +  $ hg -R repo log -r .\n> +  changeset:   0:c4018e9aea1b\n> +  user:        test\n> +  date:        Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000\n> +  summary:     1\n> +\n> +  $ cat repo\/.hgsubstate\n> +  f7b1eb17ad24730a1651fccd46c43826d1bbc2ac s\n>    $ hg -R repo update\n>    b: untracked file differs\n>    abort: untracked files in working directory differ from files in requested revision (in subrepository \"s\")\n@mharbison72 I am bit confused here.\n1) Since `hg -R repo update` resulted with an abort then why we have dirty working directory now? Isn't transaction rollback worked correctly?\n2) Also if you run `hg status` it says \"To continue: run `hg update .`\" but I don't think it's really a \"continue\", since we are still on the same changeset where we ran the first update command and running `hg update .` won't take us to the changeset we wanted to go.\n3) I found that for interrupted update (only for some particular kind of interrupted update) we store target node value in `.hg\/updatestate` but I couldn't find where we exactly use that value. I found some code which check if that file exists but not one where we use the value stored in that file.\n>    [255]\n> +  $ hg -R repo update --abort\n> +  abort: no update in progress\n> +  [255]\n> +  $ hg -R repo diff -S\n> +  diff -r c4018e9aea1b .hgsubstate\n> +  --- a\/.hgsubstate Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000\n> +  +++ b\/.hgsubstate Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000\n> +  @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@\n> +  -f7b1eb17ad24730a1651fccd46c43826d1bbc2ac s\n> +  +cc505f09a8b2644adffa368adb4abc6f70d07bc0 s\n> +  $ hg -R repo log -r .\n> +  changeset:   0:c4018e9aea1b\n> +  user:        test\n> +  date:        Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000\n> +  summary:     1\n> +\n> +\n>    $ cat >> repo\/.hg\/hgrc <<EOF\n>    > [extensions]\n>    > fakedirstatewritetime = !\n> ```\n> \n> Another good way to induce this .hgsubstate issue is to `hg pull -u` on a repo, where the remote subrepo isn't available.  You don't need http for this- you can just rename the remote subrepo.\n\n","author":"khanchi97","id":"123875","dateCreated":"1584395223","dateModified":"1584395223"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Here's a case I stumbled upon that is a problem.  It looks like it thinks it isn't in the middle of an update, but .hgsubstate isn't put back to the pre-update state.\n\n```\ndiff --git a\/tests\/test-subrepo.t b\/tests\/test-subrepo.t\n--- a\/tests\/test-subrepo.t\n+++ b\/tests\/test-subrepo.t\n@@ -1027,10 +1027,38 @@ filesystem (see also issue4583))\n   > [extensions]\n   > fakedirstatewritetime = $TESTDIR\/fakedirstatewritetime.py\n   > EOF\n+  $ hg -R repo st -S\n+  ? s\/b\n+  $ hg -R repo diff -S\n+  $ hg -R repo log -r .\n+  changeset:   0:c4018e9aea1b\n+  user:        test\n+  date:        Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000\n+  summary:     1\n+\n+  $ cat repo\/.hgsubstate\n+  f7b1eb17ad24730a1651fccd46c43826d1bbc2ac s\n   $ hg -R repo update\n   b: untracked file differs\n   abort: untracked files in working directory differ from files in requested revision (in subrepository \"s\")\n   [255]\n+  $ hg -R repo update --abort\n+  abort: no update in progress\n+  [255]\n+  $ hg -R repo diff -S\n+  diff -r c4018e9aea1b .hgsubstate\n+  --- a\/.hgsubstate Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000\n+  +++ b\/.hgsubstate Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000\n+  @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@\n+  -f7b1eb17ad24730a1651fccd46c43826d1bbc2ac s\n+  +cc505f09a8b2644adffa368adb4abc6f70d07bc0 s\n+  $ hg -R repo log -r .\n+  changeset:   0:c4018e9aea1b\n+  user:        test\n+  date:        Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000\n+  summary:     1\n+\n+\n   $ cat >> repo\/.hg\/hgrc <<EOF\n   > [extensions]\n   > fakedirstatewritetime = !\n```\n\nAnother good way to induce this .hgsubstate issue is to `hg pull -u` on a repo, where the remote subrepo isn't available.  You don't need http for this- you can just rename the remote subrepo.","author":"mharbison72","id":"100642","dateCreated":"1568603671","dateModified":"1568603671"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Oops, meant to flag changes needed too.","author":"mharbison72","id":"100435","dateCreated":"1568266462","dateModified":"1568266462"},{"type":"reject","author":"mharbison72","id":"100434","dateCreated":"1568266462","dateModified":"1568266462"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6735#100392, @durin42 wrote:\n> This looks good to me. Does anyone else have comments? @mharbison72 are you happy with the subrepo test coverage?\n\nI forgot about this, thanks for the reminder.  @taapas1128 is correct- the subrepos aren't being initialized as subrepos (i.e. there's no .hgsub file).  I'll try to play with this more Friday or over the weekend.","author":"mharbison72","id":"100433","dateCreated":"1568266403","dateModified":"1568266403"},{"type":"comment","comment":"@durin42 I don't think the subrepos are properly initialized in the tests. I would be updating them soon.","author":"taapas1128","id":"100416","dateCreated":"1568219239","dateModified":"1568219239"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This looks good to me. Does anyone else have comments? @mharbison72 are you happy with the subrepo test coverage?","author":"durin42","id":"100392","dateCreated":"1568215450","dateModified":"1568215450"},{"type":"accept","author":"durin42","id":"100391","dateCreated":"1568215450","dateModified":"1568215450"},{"type":"inline","comment":"@mharbison72 Have a look. I have updated the diff.","replyTo":"98964","isNewFile":"1","line":"2092","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-merge-tools.t","diffId":"16251","author":"taapas1128","id":"99147","dateCreated":"1566483696","dateModified":"1566483696"},{"type":"update","diffId":"16294","author":"taapas1128","id":"99144","dateCreated":"1566483618","dateModified":"1566483618"},{"type":"inline","comment":"When you add more tests, please include some with 1 dirty subrepo, and then another where the first subrepo is already merged\/resolved, and the second subrepo is dirty and pending a merge\/resolve.  If it simplifies the initial implementation to detect a dirty subrepo and then abort the `--abort` before it starts, that seems fine.","replyTo":"98944","isNewFile":"1","line":"2092","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-merge-tools.t","diffId":"16251","author":"mharbison72","id":"98964","dateCreated":"1566232323","dateModified":"1566232323"},{"type":"inline","comment":"this line is not required.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"992","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/hg.py","diffId":"16262","author":"pulkit","id":"98962","dateCreated":"1566228426","dateModified":"1566228426"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Nice start! If I remember correctly, the mergestate stores the local version of the file. We can use that directly instead.","author":"pulkit","id":"98961","dateCreated":"1566228426","dateModified":"1566228426"},{"type":"update","diffId":"16262","author":"taapas1128","id":"98945","dateCreated":"1566135118","dateModified":"1566135118"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I have created a separate file will add more tests.","replyTo":"98873","isNewFile":"1","line":"2092","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-merge-tools.t","diffId":"16251","author":"taapas1128","id":"98944","dateCreated":"1566133737","dateModified":"1566133737"},{"type":"update","diffId":"16261","author":"taapas1128","id":"98942","dateCreated":"1566133621","dateModified":"1566133621"},{"type":"inline","comment":"we need to hide this, maybe use more low level APIs. I haven't look at code in details, will try to look soon.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"2129","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-merge-tools.t","diffId":"16251","author":"pulkit","id":"98874","dateCreated":"1566070139","dateModified":"1566070139"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I suggest taking `update --abort` tests in a new file as we will need to extensively test that.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"2092","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-merge-tools.t","diffId":"16251","author":"pulkit","id":"98873","dateCreated":"1566070139","dateModified":"1566070139"},{"type":"update","diffId":"16251","author":"taapas1128","id":"98867","dateCreated":"1566069370","dateModified":"1566069370"},{"type":"update","diffId":"16250","author":"taapas1128","id":"98866","dateCreated":"1566058705","dateModified":"1566058705"},{"type":"update","diffId":"16249","author":"taapas1128","id":"98861","dateCreated":"1566058419","dateModified":"1566058419"}],"dateCreated":"1566058419","dateModified":"1592806928","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8566","callsign":"HG","title":"cleanup: use mergestate.unresolvedcount() instead of bool(list(unresolved()))","author":"durin42","summary":"This avoids some pointless copying.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"14","dependsOn":["8564"],"reviewers":["marmoute","pulkit"],"ccs":["marmoute","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"accept","author":"pulkit","id":"129088","dateCreated":"1592400314","dateModified":"1592400314"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21610","author":"durin42","id":"128884","dateCreated":"1591891650","dateModified":"1591891650"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8566#128782, @durin42 wrote:\n>>>! In D8566#128623, @marmoute wrote:\n>> how well, I see why you want an explicite method to avoid unrolling the iterator. Could we return an object with sensible __bool__ and __len__ methods?\n> \n> I'd rather not: right now we have no extra type overhead, and if we make unresolved() return some custom iterator type it'll add extra bookkeeping etc.\n> \n> If you feel strongly, I'd much rather someone that cares do that as a follow-up, since I'm just trying to do a quick-win case here.\n\nnevermind, I got confused, the unresolvedcount method existed before your series, so this patch is clear win.","author":"marmoute","id":"128836","dateCreated":"1591781704","dateModified":"1591781704"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"128835","dateCreated":"1591781704","dateModified":"1591781704"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21594","author":"durin42","id":"128793","dateCreated":"1591735901","dateModified":"1591735901"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8566#128623, @marmoute wrote:\n> how well, I see why you want an explicite method to avoid unrolling the iterator. Could we return an object with sensible __bool__ and __len__ methods?\n\nI'd rather not: right now we have no extra type overhead, and if we make unresolved() return some custom iterator type it'll add extra bookkeeping etc.\n\nIf you feel strongly, I'd much rather someone that cares do that as a follow-up, since I'm just trying to do a quick-win case here.","author":"durin42","id":"128782","dateCreated":"1591735599","dateModified":"1591735599"},{"type":"comment","comment":"how well, I see why you want an explicite method to avoid unrolling the iterator. Could we return an object with sensible __bool__ and __len__ methods?","author":"marmoute","id":"128623","dateCreated":"1591639338","dateModified":"1591639338"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21511","author":"durin42","id":"128251","dateCreated":"1590697609","dateModified":"1590697609"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21443","author":"durin42","id":"127849","dateCreated":"1589839697","dateModified":"1589839697"}],"dateCreated":"1589839697","dateModified":"1592400314","status":"Accepted"},{"id":"7177","callsign":"HG","title":"rebase: introduce optional parent mapping","author":"joerg.sonnenberger","summary":"Consider the following DAG:\n\n  C   C'\n  |\\ \/|\n  A B D\n\nwith the goal of rebasing C to C' while switching the A parent to D.\nOut of the box, rebase will fail here as it doesn't know which parent of\nC to rewrite. With the new --parentmap option, this can be specified\nexplicitly. Use cases for this functionality are dealing with manual\nrebases without obsolescence markers, e.g. git-style forced commits.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"94","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["martinvonz","baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","marmoute","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"inline","comment":"`REV:REV` is valid revset so the result is quite confusing, if we go that route, we need anothr syntax.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"884","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/rebase.py","diffId":"17411","author":"marmoute","id":"128831","dateCreated":"1591780504","dateModified":"1591780504"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7177#128760, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>! In D7177#128757, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>>! In D7177#128756, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>>>! In D7177#128740, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>>>>! In D7177#128389, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>>> Maybe another option is to allow multiple `-d` arguments for this case? Something like `hg rebase -r C -d B -d D`. I haven't thought through BC, but I think that's what I'd prefer if we were writing rebase from scratch. I know we can't support `hg rebase -r C -d 'B + D'` for backward-compatibility reasons (because we already support that -- it rebases to the highest revnum in the set).\n>>>> \n>>>> That's interresting. How would that works with a practical case ?\n>>> \n>>> The example I have was meant to be a practical example for how to do it in the case given in the patch description :) But let me know if you meant some other aspect of \"how it works\". As I said, I'm not sure ant the BC bit of it at least.\n>> \n>> I meant how that would work in general, esepcially case more complicated than the basic base shown by @joerg.sonnenberger.\n> \n> I think the parents chosen by `-d` should only apply to the roots of the rebase set. If your rebase set has multiple roots and only some of them are merge commits, then we should probably error out.\n\nSo you suggestion would be to allow to specify two -d that would definive the two new parents of the root ? I suspect it would be a bit too narrow compared to the varienty of case we might have to handle. Maybe this is a mission for PlanPlan.\n\n> Anyway, I'm not sure it's realistic to make it work that way now, especially because of how inconsistent it would be with other arguments that accept revsets and only care about the highest revnum in the set (I think that was a mistake to do, but I understand why it was done that way and it's obviously too late to change it).\n\nI think the multiple -d value approach would works fine. (but for the other issue).\n\n>> Not that in @joerg base, B being ancestors of both C and C', we could probably behave better by default directly. Could we not ?\n> \n> As @joerg said in the patch description, there's no reasonable way to choose which of A and B to preserve (the current version of rebase wouldn't preserve either and would instead rebase all of A, B, and C).\n\nThe description got me confused, (I though C was rebased on C' (finding the naming strange)) while this is about C being rebased on D.\n\n","author":"marmoute","id":"128830","dateCreated":"1591780504","dateModified":"1591780504"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7177#128757, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>! In D7177#128756, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>>! In D7177#128740, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>>>! In D7177#128389, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>> Maybe another option is to allow multiple `-d` arguments for this case? Something like `hg rebase -r C -d B -d D`. I haven't thought through BC, but I think that's what I'd prefer if we were writing rebase from scratch. I know we can't support `hg rebase -r C -d 'B + D'` for backward-compatibility reasons (because we already support that -- it rebases to the highest revnum in the set).\n>>> \n>>> That's interresting. How would that works with a practical case ?\n>> \n>> The example I have was meant to be a practical example for how to do it in the case given in the patch description :) But let me know if you meant some other aspect of \"how it works\". As I said, I'm not sure ant the BC bit of it at least.\n> \n> I meant how that would work in general, esepcially case more complicated than the basic base shown by @joerg.sonnenberger.\n\nI think the parents chosen by `-d` should only apply to the roots of the rebase set. If your rebase set has multiple roots and only some of them are merge commits, then we should probably error out.\n\nAnyway, I'm not sure it's realistic to make it work that way now, especially because of how inconsistent it would be with other arguments that accept revsets and only care about the highest revnum in the set (I think that was a mistake to do, but I understand why it was done that way and it's obviously too late to change it).\n\n> \n> Not that in @joerg base, B being ancestors of both C and C', we could probably behave better by default directly. Could we not ?\n\nAs @joerg said in the patch description, there's no reasonable way to choose which of A and B to preserve (the current version of rebase wouldn't preserve either and would instead rebase all of A, B, and C).","author":"martinvonz","id":"128760","dateCreated":"1591719313","dateModified":"1591719313"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7177#128756, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>! In D7177#128740, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>>! In D7177#128389, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>> Maybe another option is to allow multiple `-d` arguments for this case? Something like `hg rebase -r C -d B -d D`. I haven't thought through BC, but I think that's what I'd prefer if we were writing rebase from scratch. I know we can't support `hg rebase -r C -d 'B + D'` for backward-compatibility reasons (because we already support that -- it rebases to the highest revnum in the set).\n>> \n>> That's interresting. How would that works with a practical case ?\n> \n> The example I have was meant to be a practical example for how to do it in the case given in the patch description :) But let me know if you meant some other aspect of \"how it works\". As I said, I'm not sure ant the BC bit of it at least.\n\nI meant how that would work in general, esepcially case more complicated than the basic base shown by @joerg.sonnenberger.\n\nNot that in @joerg base, B being ancestors of both C and C', we could probably behave better by default directly. Could we not ?","author":"marmoute","id":"128757","dateCreated":"1591717623","dateModified":"1591717623"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7177#128740, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>! In D7177#128389, @martinvonz wrote:\n>> Maybe another option is to allow multiple `-d` arguments for this case? Something like `hg rebase -r C -d B -d D`. I haven't thought through BC, but I think that's what I'd prefer if we were writing rebase from scratch. I know we can't support `hg rebase -r C -d 'B + D'` for backward-compatibility reasons (because we already support that -- it rebases to the highest revnum in the set).\n> \n> That's interresting. How would that works with a practical case ?\n\nThe example I have was meant to be a practical example for how to do it in the case given in the patch description :) But let me know if you meant some other aspect of \"how it works\". As I said, I'm not sure ant the BC bit of it at least.","author":"martinvonz","id":"128756","dateCreated":"1591712758","dateModified":"1591712758"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7177#128389, @martinvonz wrote:\n> Maybe another option is to allow multiple `-d` arguments for this case? Something like `hg rebase -r C -d B -d D`. I haven't thought through BC, but I think that's what I'd prefer if we were writing rebase from scratch. I know we can't support `hg rebase -r C -d 'B + D'` for backward-compatibility reasons (because we already support that -- it rebases to the highest revnum in the set).\n\nThat's interresting. How would that works with a practical case ?","author":"marmoute","id":"128740","dateCreated":"1591703040","dateModified":"1591703040"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Maybe another option is to allow multiple `-d` arguments for this case? Something like `hg rebase -r C -d B -d D`. I haven't thought through BC, but I think that's what I'd prefer if we were writing rebase from scratch. I know we can't support `hg rebase -r C -d 'B + D'` for backward-compatibility reasons (because we already support that -- it rebases to the highest revnum in the set).","author":"martinvonz","id":"128389","dateCreated":"1590862104","dateModified":"1590862104"},{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"126385","dateCreated":"1587570775","dateModified":"1587570775"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"126384","dateCreated":"1587570775","dateModified":"1587570775"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I like the idea of using adding this to graft.","author":"marmoute","id":"117272","dateCreated":"1579797555","dateModified":"1579797555"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I personally haven't queued this yet because I don't really like the UI. Some things I recently worked on made me realize that `hg graft` doesn't currently preserve merges, but we could probably easily add a `--preserve-merges` option to it, so `hg co D; hg graft --base B --preserve-merges` would take care of the case in the commit message.","author":"martinvonz","id":"116330","dateCreated":"1579212527","dateModified":"1579212527"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I changed the commit message to indent the graph by two spaces. That way it renders better here in Phabricator.","author":"martinvonz","id":"105323","dateCreated":"1572413915","dateModified":"1572413915"},{"type":"update","diffId":"17411","author":"joerg.sonnenberger","id":"105313","dateCreated":"1572292928","dateModified":"1572292928"},{"type":"update","diffId":"17410","author":"joerg.sonnenberger","id":"105307","dateCreated":"1572279428","dateModified":"1572279428"}],"dateCreated":"1572279427","dateModified":"1591780504","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8524","callsign":"HG","title":"phabricator: load .arcconfig during reposetup (issue6331)","author":"sfink","summary":"Wrapping localrepo's loadhgrc() was not working for me because it is too late to wrap loadhgrc when the extension is loaded.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"38","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["mharbison72","marmoute"],"ccs":["marmoute","Kwan","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to be extra explanation and style change required (as per @mharbisson72 comment).","author":"marmoute","id":"128599","dateCreated":"1591638000","dateModified":"1591638000"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"128598","dateCreated":"1591638000","dateModified":"1591638000"},{"type":"inline","comment":"`if not repo.local()` is the typical way to do this check.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"175","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/phabricator.py","diffId":"21386","author":"mharbison72","id":"127507","dateCreated":"1589648649","dateModified":"1589648649"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I'll try to take a closer look at this some time this weekend.  In the meantime, can you explain more why it didn't work for you?  There are tests that cover this feature, so I'm wondering if some coverage is missing.\n\nI'm not sure if this is intentional, but it appears that it will unconditionally override even `.hg\/hgrc` configs if `.arcconfig` is present.  Before it would only override the global config, load `.arcconfig`, and then load `.hg\/hgrc`.  I guess it's only a small benefit that you could re-target the phab instance without dirtying the repo, so I'm not strongly against the change.\n\nOne of the lines looks like it might be long-ish, so you might want to run `.\/run-tests --local test-phabricator.t test-check-*` to make sure it's OK.","author":"mharbison72","id":"127506","dateCreated":"1589648649","dateModified":"1589648649"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21386","author":"sfink","id":"127460","dateCreated":"1589501713","dateModified":"1589501713"}],"dateCreated":"1589501713","dateModified":"1591638000","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8064","callsign":"HG","title":"split: add a --single flag to only ask for one split","author":"rdamazio","summary":"The majority of split invocations only want to split a revision in two,\nso this allows them to do that without getting a second chunk selector.\nI thought of making a generic \"max_splits\" flag, but that seemed like\noverkill.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"72","dependsOn":["7630"],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"128590","dateCreated":"1591637695","dateModified":"1591637695"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"128589","dateCreated":"1591637695","dateModified":"1591637695"},{"type":"update","diffId":"19813","author":"rdamazio","id":"118999","dateCreated":"1580542108","dateModified":"1580542108"}],"dateCreated":"1580542108","dateModified":"1591637696","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"7630","callsign":"HG","title":"absorb: make the absorbed changeset be automatically \"evolved\"","author":"rdamazio","summary":"When a committed changeset is absorbed, this will make it so it's not used for\ncomputing the absorption, but is still recreated at the destination.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"92","dependsOn":["7631"],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","marmoute","pulkit","martinvonz","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"128586","dateCreated":"1591637695","dateModified":"1591637695"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"128585","dateCreated":"1591637695","dateModified":"1591637695"},{"type":"comment","comment":"It looks like this series is introducing UI change of the same kind  as the one @martinvonz is looking into for `hg copy`. I'll try to have a look at both of them tomorrow.","author":"marmoute","id":"120511","dateCreated":"1581460836","dateModified":"1581460836"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7630#118997, @rdamazio wrote:\n>>>>! In D7630#117270, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>>>! In D7630#115320, @pulkit wrote:\n>>>>>> This results in an empty commit which is not similar to what rebase or evolve will generally result in after `D7631` unless `ui.allowemptycommit=True` is set. I think good behavior is to obsolete the absorbed changeset in favour of either it's parent or one of the revs in which it was absorbed. \n>>>>> \n>>>>> I made a related comment on the parent patch before I realized that this patch adds obsmarker handling. My suggestion there was to mark all the commits that got absorbed into as successors, and if there's anything left in the absorbed commit, that would be yet another successor. Would that work?\n>>>> \n>>>> Yep, that sounds good.\n>> \n>> I'm fine with doing this, but is there an efficient way to detect that it became empty?\n> \n> And by \"this\" I meant I'm fine with making it disappear if allowemptycommit is False. I don't fully understand how markers help accomplish that.\n\nWhen you try to create an empty commit, you'll get a `None` back for the nodeid (from `repo.commitctx()`, IIRC), so check for that.","author":"martinvonz","id":"120510","dateCreated":"1581445623","dateModified":"1581445623"},{"type":"update","diffId":"19982","author":"rdamazio","id":"119745","dateCreated":"1581045062","dateModified":"1581045062"},{"type":"update","diffId":"19980","author":"rdamazio","id":"119741","dateCreated":"1581044151","dateModified":"1581044151"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>>! In D7630#117270, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>>! In D7630#115320, @pulkit wrote:\n>>>>> This results in an empty commit which is not similar to what rebase or evolve will generally result in after `D7631` unless `ui.allowemptycommit=True` is set. I think good behavior is to obsolete the absorbed changeset in favour of either it's parent or one of the revs in which it was absorbed. \n>>>> \n>>>> I made a related comment on the parent patch before I realized that this patch adds obsmarker handling. My suggestion there was to mark all the commits that got absorbed into as successors, and if there's anything left in the absorbed commit, that would be yet another successor. Would that work?\n>>> \n>>> Yep, that sounds good.\n> \n> I'm fine with doing this, but is there an efficient way to detect that it became empty?\n\nAnd by \"this\" I meant I'm fine with making it disappear if allowemptycommit is False. I don't fully understand how markers help accomplish that.\n","author":"rdamazio","id":"118997","dateCreated":"1580541152","dateModified":"1580541152"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7630#115300, @pulkit wrote:\n> This results in an empty commit which is not similar to what rebase or evolve will generally result in after `D7631` unless `ui.allowemptycommit=True` is set. I think good behavior is to obsolete the absorbed changeset in favour of either it's parent or one of the revs in which it was absorbed. \n\nIt's not *always* empty - if there had been lines that it failed absorb (because it couldn't find where to absorb into), those would be left in the commit.\n\n>>! In D7630#117270, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>! In D7630#115320, @pulkit wrote:\n>>>> This results in an empty commit which is not similar to what rebase or evolve will generally result in after `D7631` unless `ui.allowemptycommit=True` is set. I think good behavior is to obsolete the absorbed changeset in favour of either it's parent or one of the revs in which it was absorbed. \n>>> \n>>> I made a related comment on the parent patch before I realized that this patch adds obsmarker handling. My suggestion there was to mark all the commits that got absorbed into as successors, and if there's anything left in the absorbed commit, that would be yet another successor. Would that work?\n>> \n>> Yep, that sounds good.\n\nI'm fine with doing this, but is there an efficient way to detect that it became empty?\n\n> This means generate split+fold markers. That is going to be fun to deal with :-). I dont' really have any much better idea however (the alternative seems to use simple prune markers, which is meh).\n\nI'm not following this part - why do you need markers at all?\n(you can argue whether you want them - but I don't see why you *need* them)\n","author":"rdamazio","id":"118992","dateCreated":"1580541029","dateModified":"1580541029"},{"type":"update","diffId":"19812","author":"rdamazio","id":"118991","dateCreated":"1580541026","dateModified":"1580541026"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7630#115320, @pulkit wrote:\n>>> This results in an empty commit which is not similar to what rebase or evolve will generally result in after `D7631` unless `ui.allowemptycommit=True` is set. I think good behavior is to obsolete the absorbed changeset in favour of either it's parent or one of the revs in which it was absorbed. \n>> \n>> I made a related comment on the parent patch before I realized that this patch adds obsmarker handling. My suggestion there was to mark all the commits that got absorbed into as successors, and if there's anything left in the absorbed commit, that would be yet another successor. Would that work?\n> \n> Yep, that sounds good.\n\nThis means generate split+fold markers. That is going to be fun to deal with :-). I dont' really have any much better idea however (the alternative seems to use simple prune markers, which is meh).","author":"marmoute","id":"117270","dateCreated":"1579797461","dateModified":"1579797461"},{"type":"comment","comment":">> This results in an empty commit which is not similar to what rebase or evolve will generally result in after `D7631` unless `ui.allowemptycommit=True` is set. I think good behavior is to obsolete the absorbed changeset in favour of either it's parent or one of the revs in which it was absorbed. \n> \n> I made a related comment on the parent patch before I realized that this patch adds obsmarker handling. My suggestion there was to mark all the commits that got absorbed into as successors, and if there's anything left in the absorbed commit, that would be yet another successor. Would that work?\n\nYep, that sounds good.\n","author":"pulkit","id":"115320","dateCreated":"1578937060","dateModified":"1578937078"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7630#112603, @rdamazio wrote:\n> Sorry for the upload mess (though it's arguably a `phabsend` bug :) ). Tried uploading the \"right\" way now.\n\nI reported that as https:\/\/bz.mercurial-scm.org\/show_bug.cgi?id=6241.\n\n>>! In D7630#115300, @pulkit wrote:\n> This results in an empty commit which is not similar to what rebase or evolve will generally result in after `D7631` unless `ui.allowemptycommit=True` is set. I think good behavior is to obsolete the absorbed changeset in favour of either it's parent or one of the revs in which it was absorbed. \n\nI made a related comment on the parent patch before I realized that this patch adds obsmarker handling. My suggestion there was to mark all the commits that got absorbed into as successors, and if there's anything left in the absorbed commit, that would be yet another successor. Would that work?","author":"martinvonz","id":"115319","dateCreated":"1578936945","dateModified":"1578936945"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This results in an empty commit which is not similar to what rebase or evolve will generally result in after `D7631` unless `ui.allowemptycommit=True` is set. I think good behavior is to obsolete the absorbed changeset in favour of either it's parent or one of the revs in which it was absorbed. ","author":"pulkit","id":"115300","dateCreated":"1578931057","dateModified":"1578931057"},{"type":"update","diffId":"19049","author":"rdamazio","id":"114543","dateCreated":"1578357967","dateModified":"1578357967"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18874","author":"rdamazio","id":"113354","dateCreated":"1576741000","dateModified":"1576741000"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18844","author":"rdamazio","id":"113173","dateCreated":"1576644413","dateModified":"1576644413"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18842","author":"rdamazio","id":"113169","dateCreated":"1576644149","dateModified":"1576644149"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18729","author":"rdamazio","id":"112606","dateCreated":"1576304727","dateModified":"1576304727"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Sorry for the upload mess (though it's arguably a `phabsend` bug :) ). Tried uploading the \"right\" way now.","author":"rdamazio","id":"112603","dateCreated":"1576303334","dateModified":"1576303334"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18727","author":"rdamazio","id":"112600","dateCreated":"1576303329","dateModified":"1576303329"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7630#112243, @rdamazio wrote:\n> (on mobile) I think it was `hg phabsend -r .+.^`\n\nOhh, that makes some sense that phabsend might do it backwards if you pass the revisions backwards, but that's still clearly a bug. I'll report it in bugzilla if it's not already there. I'll manually update the parent\/child relationship on these reviews for now.\n","author":"martinvonz","id":"112244","dateCreated":"1576220268","dateModified":"1576220268"},{"type":"comment","comment":"(on mobile) I think it was `hg phabsend -r .+.^`\n\n  - {F454947, layout=link}","author":"rdamazio","id":"112243","dateCreated":"1576219938","dateModified":"1576219938"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Oh, it's added in D7631, which is marked as a *child* of this review. How did that happen? `hg phabsend` should set the relationships automatically. How did you run that command? Just `hg phabsend .^::.` or  similar? Or did you manually mark D7631 as a child?","replyTo":"112239","isNewFile":"1","line":"67","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-absorb-rev.t","diffId":"18665","author":"martinvonz","id":"112241","dateCreated":"1576219632","dateModified":"1576219632"},{"type":"inline","comment":"`hg absorb` has a `-r` flag? Did you forgot to upload some ancestors of this commit?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"67","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-absorb-rev.t","diffId":"18665","author":"martinvonz","id":"112239","dateCreated":"1576217462","dateModified":"1576217462"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18665","author":"rdamazio","id":"112225","dateCreated":"1576216538","dateModified":"1576216538"}],"dateCreated":"1576216538","dateModified":"1591637695","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"7384","callsign":"HG","title":"commands: necessary annotations and suppresssions to pass pytype","author":"durin42","summary":"As with other places, there are some places where our types are just\ntoo complicated for pytype, so we put some suppressions in place.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"24","dependsOn":["7296"],"reviewers":["dlax","marmoute","baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","marmoute","dlax","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"128582","dateCreated":"1591637694","dateModified":"1591637694"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"128581","dateCreated":"1591637694","dateModified":"1591637694"},{"type":"comment","comment":"There don't seems to be any remaininf feedback on this.","author":"marmoute","id":"120850","dateCreated":"1581668481","dateModified":"1581668481"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"120849","dateCreated":"1581668481","dateModified":"1581668481"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I think this comment should be removed since the `# pytype: disable` got removed in the last version of the diff.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"4741","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/commands.py","diffId":"18171","author":"dlax","id":"118745","dateCreated":"1580412376","dateModified":"1580412376"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7384#118739, @marmoute wrote:\n> What's up on this ? It seemed on a good track, but I don't think it landed. @dlax I think you offer to use a context manager got a warm welcome, I would says, go ahead with it.\n\nThe context manager got in through D7430.","author":"dlax","id":"118744","dateCreated":"1580412376","dateModified":"1580412376"},{"type":"comment","comment":"What's up on this ? It seemed on a good track, but I don't think it landed. @dlax I think you offer to use a context manager got a warm welcome, I would says, go ahead with it.","author":"marmoute","id":"118739","dateCreated":"1580409172","dateModified":"1580409172"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18171","author":"durin42","id":"109261","dateCreated":"1573854923","dateModified":"1573854923"},{"type":"inline","comment":"`revs` is always a `smartset.baseset` per af9c73f26371 so there should be no attribute error. Or is it because `logcmdutil.getlinerangerevs()` has no type annotation (whereas `logcmdutil.getrevs()` has some)?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"4742","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/commands.py","diffId":"18162","author":"dlax","id":"109205","dateCreated":"1573839647","dateModified":"1573839647"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18162","author":"durin42","id":"109201","dateCreated":"1573839083","dateModified":"1573839083"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I still want to keep the annotations I added. :)","author":"durin42","id":"109194","dateCreated":"1573838661","dateModified":"1573838661"},{"type":"comment","comment":"D7430 makes this changes unnecessary I think.","author":"dlax","id":"109165","dateCreated":"1573816122","dateModified":"1573816122"},{"type":"reject","author":"dlax","id":"109163","dateCreated":"1573816122","dateModified":"1573816122"},{"type":"inline","comment":"By all means!","replyTo":"108589","isNewFile":"1","line":"1127","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/commands.py","diffId":"18071","author":"durin42","id":"108819","dateCreated":"1573766153","dateModified":"1573766153"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18099","author":"durin42","id":"108777","dateCreated":"1573765800","dateModified":"1573765800"},{"type":"inline","comment":"This one is sad. I think this can be sorted out by replacing the `try:\/finally:` with a context manager. (Can send a patch, if it sounds good to you.)","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"1127","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/commands.py","diffId":"18071","author":"dlax","id":"108589","dateCreated":"1573724725","dateModified":"1573724725"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18071","author":"durin42","id":"108529","dateCreated":"1573703495","dateModified":"1573703495"}],"dateCreated":"1573703495","dateModified":"1591637694","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8480","callsign":"HG","title":"bundle: make obsolescence parts optional","author":"joerg.sonnenberger","summary":"It is useful to ship obsolescence markers as part of clonebundles or\npullbundles, but they shouldn't stop a non-evolution client from\nworking. Marking the part as optional is enough to ensure this.\nThis does not affect dynamically created bundles part of the regular\npull\/push exchange. Adjust existing test case coverage to ensure this is\nvisible.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"76","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["durin42","marmoute","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8480#127657, @durin42 wrote:\n> This patch is contentious, but I'm a little unclear why. Summarizing so everyone at least parses my thoughts roughly the way I mean: mandatory parts mean \"fail if you can't process this part.\" It seems basically reasonable to me that a client can choose to ignore (perhaps through ignorance) obsolete markers and it'll be potentially confusing, but not \/wrong\/ in that they'll have the changesets they expected, but also didn't lose some the server thought they would. It feels like a bug if a client requests obsmarkers and then discards them?\n\nI guess the misundestanding is here. Not exchanching markers when we should give **wrong** result and user activelly complains and report bugs then it happens to them. Hooks and checks can also get confused by the broken end-state this creates.\n\n> But in the case of any kind of pre-computed bundle it's a little trickier because if the server (as an optimization, in this case) emits obsmarkers that the client didn't request, it could break old clients.\n\nIn the case of precomputed bundled explicitly used as cache (pull bundle\/clone bundke9, having the markers optional seems fine since the client will performs a full pull afterward, pull markers they might have missed earlier. My proposal of having a bundlespec option for this case `hg bundle -t v2;obsolescence=optional` should be covering that case, unless I am missing something.\n\nIn the other case of people using bundles to exchange data (eg: by email or with USB dongle). Making the part optionnal can lead to people not exchanging what they want, leading to wrong result, confusion and bug report\/perception.\n\n\n> Given that obsmarkers are still off by default and effectively experimental, we can change whatever we want. So the question is: should we, and if so, should it be all obsmarker parts or only precomputed ones? I think it's pretty clear that we should at least allow optional obsmarker parts for precomputed bundles, and I think we also should allow mandatory obsmarker parts (so if you try to push markers to a server that doesn't grok them you get an error instead of ninja-duplicating some changesets with their evolved counterparts.)\n> \n> So that leaves us with the one remaining question: what should the server do when the client proactively requests markers? I think in that case it basically doesn't matter, so either way is fine. If it's less work, I'm inclined to land the patch as-is, and we can do a follow-up if there's a bug case that I'm not understanding today.\n\nI don't undestand your point here. If a client request obsmarkers and does not  (effectively) receive them, the result if wrong, the end state can ge broken, user get confused and report\/percieve bugs.","author":"marmoute","id":"128410","dateCreated":"1591096933","dateModified":"1591096933"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This patch is contentious, but I'm a little unclear why. Summarizing so everyone at least parses my thoughts roughly the way I mean: mandatory parts mean \"fail if you can't process this part.\" It seems basically reasonable to me that a client can choose to ignore (perhaps through ignorance) obsolete markers and it'll be potentially confusing, but not \/wrong\/ in that they'll have the changesets they expected, but also didn't lose some the server thought they would. It feels like a bug if a client requests obsmarkers and then discards them? But in the case of any kind of pre-computed bundle it's a little trickier because if the server (as an optimization, in this case) emits obsmarkers that the client didn't request, it could break old clients.\n\nGiven that obsmarkers are still off by default and effectively experimental, we can change whatever we want. So the question is: should we, and if so, should it be all obsmarker parts or only precomputed ones? I think it's pretty clear that we should at least allow optional obsmarker parts for precomputed bundles, and I think we also should allow mandatory obsmarker parts (so if you try to push markers to a server that doesn't grok them you get an error instead of ninja-duplicating some changesets with their evolved counterparts.)\n\nSo that leaves us with the one remaining question: what should the server do when the client proactively requests markers? I think in that case it basically doesn't matter, so either way is fine. If it's less work, I'm inclined to land the patch as-is, and we can do a follow-up if there's a bug case that I'm not understanding today.\n\n\n>>! In D8480#127571, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>! In D8480#127498, @joerg.sonnenberger wrote:\n>> While I don't really agree with the design interpretation of why the server should send mandatory, I don't care enough in this case.\n> \n> The is no \"design interpretation going on here\", am I the author of these APIs\/protocols and I am clarifying  their semantics. The intend for this part to be mandatory in the context have been here since the begining.\n\nGiven that we've got at least two readers that misinterpreted your intent, please send a clarifying patch to the protocol docs (along with rationale, preferably) so the intent is more clear? I think that might also be a good place to discuss what the semantics _should_ be, in case people have feelings that merit further discussion.","author":"durin42","id":"127657","dateCreated":"1589816393","dateModified":"1589816393"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8480#127498, @joerg.sonnenberger wrote:\n> While I don't really agree with the design interpretation of why the server should send mandatory, I don't care enough in this case.\n\nThe is no \"design interpretation going on here\", am I the author of these APIs\/protocols and I am clarifying  their semantics. The intend for this part to be mandatory in the context have been here since the begining.\n\n> With the update, bundle and pull\/push are getting different flags.\n\nAs I pointed out in my previous reply, there are valid usecase for having the part mandatory in a bundle too. Can you apply me recommendation and add a third values to the existing bundle-spec parameter for your usecase?\n\n","author":"marmoute","id":"127571","dateCreated":"1589716288","dateModified":"1589716288"},{"type":"comment","comment":"While I don't really agree with the design interpretation of why the server should send mandatory, I don't care enough in this case. With the update, bundle and pull\/push are getting different flags.","author":"joerg.sonnenberger","id":"127498","dateCreated":"1589549731","dateModified":"1589549731"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21391","author":"joerg.sonnenberger","id":"127494","dateCreated":"1589549623","dateModified":"1589549623"},{"type":"comment","comment":"TL;DR; We should add a third value to the bundlespec argument: `hg bundle -t v2;obsolescence=optional`\n\n### about part in general\n\nParts that are mandatory are parts that most be processed for the request (eg: push) or reply (eg: pull) to correct. Such parts are either verification steps or core payload that contains the content that was requested to be transfered.\n\nAdvisory parts carries information that will helps the applying side, but can be ignored without compromising the \"result\" of the bundle application.\n\n### about push\/pull\n\nMost exchanges happens through push and pull in these cases the two peers can negociate contents and capabilities, and the bundling side knows: (1) what is is requested to be exchanged (2) what the receiving side is expected to support.  Requested content (eg: changesets, phases, obsmarkers) are sent in mandatory parts, because failure to transfer them would mean the failure of the exchange.  The same a push not sending the changeset it should should be a failure, a push not sending the markers it should, should be a failure. Not sending markers result in changeset not being obsoleted and uter confusion for the user.\n\nSo the markers must be sent in a mandatory part during push\/pull (same as the other important payload). If the receiving peer get a part version it does not understant, there is a bug, and it should bark.\n\n### about offline bundle\n\nThe case of offline bundle is a bit tricker. Two people might be exchanging data on purpose, expecting the obsmarker to be exchanged, or we can be in a blind case were data is pre-generated for all.\n\nIn the first case, we want the part to be mandatory, because the users wants the markers to be exchanges. In the second case, the server operator only want a best effort approach were users who do not care about the markers should not take them.\n\n### Possible way forward.\n\nWe already have a bundlespec argument to control obsmarkers inclusion:\n\n```\nhg bundle -t v2;obsolescence=yes  # with obsmarker\nhg bundle -t v2;obsolescence=no   # without obsmarkers\n```\n\nIt seems simple to add a third value, to include them as advisory:\n\n\n```\nhg bundle -t v2;obsolescence=optional   # without obsmarkers\n```\n\nServer operator could that option to pregenerate bundles.","author":"marmoute","id":"126939","dateCreated":"1588842600","dateModified":"1588842600"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This patch is contentious, but I'm a little unclear why. Summarizing so everyone at least parses my thoughts roughly the way I mean: mandatory parts mean \"fail if you can't process this part.\" It seems basically reasonable to me that a client can choose to ignore (perhaps through ignorance) obsolete markers and it'll be potentially confusing, but not \/wrong\/ in that they'll have the changesets they expected, but also didn't lose some the server thought they would. It feels like a bug if a client requests obsmarkers and then discards them? But in the case of any kind of pre-computed bundle it's a little trickier because if the server (as an optimization, in this case) emits obsmarkers that the client didn't request, it could break old clients.\n\nGiven that obsmarkers are still off by default and effectively experimental, we can change whatever we want. So the question is: should we, and if so, should it be all obsmarker parts or only precomputed ones? I think it's pretty clear that we should at least allow optional obsmarker parts for precomputed bundles, and I think we also should allow mandatory obsmarker parts (so if you try to push markers to a server that doesn't grok them you get an error instead of ninja-duplicating some changesets with their evolved counterparts.)\n\nSo that leaves us with the one remaining question: what should the server do when the client proactively requests markers? I think in that case it basically doesn't matter, so either way is fine. If it's less work, I'm inclined to land the patch as-is, and we can do a follow-up if there's a bug case that I'm not understanding today.\n","author":"durin42","id":"126878","dateCreated":"1588347922","dateModified":"1588347922"},{"type":"comment","comment":"My point is that it would be fine to make it optional for the bundle generated for clone\/pull bundle. But in the general exchange case, is the client explicitly requested markerss, serving them is not optional.","author":"marmoute","id":"126662","dateCreated":"1587743158","dateModified":"1587743158"},{"type":"comment","comment":"The main motivation for this change is to allow clonebundles and the like to properly seed the OBS exchange. I consider OBS markers optional metadata and the current handling of the exchange agrees with that. As such, it should be up to the consumer of the bundle to decide whether they can or want to do something useful with that data. As such, I consider this a step toward being able to enable the option by default.","author":"joerg.sonnenberger","id":"126661","dateCreated":"1587743015","dateModified":"1587743015"},{"type":"comment","comment":"We could add an option to make them optional when bundling, but we should not make it so by default. This code is triggered because the obsmarkers part have been explicitely requested, marking the part as optional seems wrong.","author":"marmoute","id":"126658","dateCreated":"1587742098","dateModified":"1587742098"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"126657","dateCreated":"1587742098","dateModified":"1587742098"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21212","author":"joerg.sonnenberger","id":"126651","dateCreated":"1587741829","dateModified":"1587741829"}],"dateCreated":"1587741829","dateModified":"1591096933","status":"Needs Review"},{"id":"8579","callsign":"HG","title":"context: avoid computing status twice when comparing among revisions","author":"rom1dep","summary":"","testPlan":"","lineCount":"13","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["marmoute","durin42"],"ccs":["durin42","marmoute","mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"Breaks many tests for status code, sadly.\n\n(Regrettably, I've already lost that output, and I need to go get lunch with family.)","author":"durin42","id":"128128","dateCreated":"1590511068","dateModified":"1590511068"},{"type":"reject","author":"durin42","id":"128127","dateCreated":"1590511068","dateModified":"1590511068"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This looks fine.","author":"marmoute","id":"128062","dateCreated":"1590500737","dateModified":"1590500737"},{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"128061","dateCreated":"1590500737","dateModified":"1590500737"},{"type":"comment","comment":"No real justification for, only found it weird, and since we have to do that test anyway I didn't think it would make perfs worse,\nDidn't run tests on it, though.","author":"rom1dep","id":"128003","dateCreated":"1590389462","dateModified":"1590389462"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21466","author":"rom1dep","id":"127999","dateCreated":"1590389282","dateModified":"1590389282"}],"dateCreated":"1590389282","dateModified":"1590511069","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8571","callsign":"HG","title":"test: make test-doctest.py not assume it's run from a mercurial repo","author":"jcristau","summary":"This assumption fails when building and running tests from a source\ntarball, e.g.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"16","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":[],"ccs":["mercurial-patches"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"Need to fix some stuff, I'll get back to this tomorrow.","author":"jcristau","id":"127919","dateCreated":"1589920648","dateModified":"1589920648"},{"type":"plan-changes","author":"jcristau","id":"127918","dateCreated":"1589920648","dateModified":"1589920648"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21450","author":"jcristau","id":"127903","dateCreated":"1589916511","dateModified":"1589916511"}],"dateCreated":"1589916511","dateModified":"1589920648","status":"Changes Planned"},{"id":"6026","callsign":"HG","title":"lock: Improve the waiting for lock message which will help newcomers\n(issue6081)","author":"akshjain.jain74","summary":"","testPlan":"","lineCount":"71","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","marmoute","pulkit","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"126762","dateCreated":"1588061930","dateModified":"1588061930"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"126761","dateCreated":"1588061930","dateModified":"1588061930"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Gentle ping on this. This has been around for a long time, what's the status of it?","author":"marmoute","id":"117290","dateCreated":"1579799546","dateModified":"1579799546"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6026#88552, @pulkit wrote:\n> I am not sure the new message is much helpful. As JordiGH and others pointed out on IRC, it will definitely be helpful if we can show which operation has the lock right now.\n> \n> Something like:\n> \n> `waiting for lock on working directory of b held by process '*' running <cmd-name> on host '*'`\n\nSo for which commands we can show this message, like i got message when i run hg commit --amend sometimes ","author":"akshjain.jain74","id":"88558","dateCreated":"1551900706","dateModified":"1551900706"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I accept these changes while running test,  if i am not changing this then it will cause test failing","replyTo":"88554","isNewFile":"0","line":"18","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-lock-badness.t","diffId":"14277","author":"akshjain.jain74","id":"88557","dateCreated":"1551893473","dateModified":"1551893473"},{"type":"comment","comment":"okay @pulkit let me work upon your suggestion and ","author":"akshjain.jain74","id":"88556","dateCreated":"1551893473","dateModified":"1551893473"},{"type":"inline","comment":"The output is not correctly aligned. ","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"62","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-lock-badness.t","diffId":"14291","author":"pulkit","id":"88555","dateCreated":"1551879636","dateModified":"1551879636"},{"type":"inline","comment":"still here are unrealted changes.","replyTo":"88052","isNewFile":"0","line":"18","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-lock-badness.t","diffId":"14277","author":"pulkit","id":"88554","dateCreated":"1551879636","dateModified":"1551879636"},{"type":"inline","comment":"unrelated changes.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"155","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-extdiff.t","diffId":"14291","author":"pulkit","id":"88553","dateCreated":"1551879636","dateModified":"1551879636"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I am not sure the new message is much helpful. As JordiGH and others pointed out on IRC, it will definitely be helpful if we can show which operation has the lock right now.\n\nSomething like:\n\n`waiting for lock on working directory of b held by process '*' running <cmd-name> on host '*'`","author":"pulkit","id":"88552","dateCreated":"1551879636","dateModified":"1551879636"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14291","author":"akshjain.jain74","id":"88119","dateCreated":"1551530162","dateModified":"1551530162"},{"type":"comment","comment":"@pulkit done changes as per your suggestion in lock file too but what did you meant by storelock?","author":"akshjain.jain74","id":"88059","dateCreated":"1551392049","dateModified":"1551392049"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14279","author":"akshjain.jain74","id":"88056","dateCreated":"1551391885","dateModified":"1551391885"},{"type":"inline","comment":"unrelated changes in the test file here and below.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"0","line":"18","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-lock-badness.t","diffId":"14277","author":"pulkit","id":"88052","dateCreated":"1551389487","dateModified":"1551389487"},{"type":"inline","comment":"remove which file manually to continue?\n\nI think we should delete the `If it still fails, ..... remove the file manually to continue` part.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"316","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/journal.py","diffId":"14277","author":"pulkit","id":"88051","dateCreated":"1551389487","dateModified":"1551389487"},{"type":"inline","comment":"This is only for locking namejournal.lock and not for working directory lock and store lock. We need to improve message there too.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"310","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/journal.py","diffId":"14277","author":"pulkit","id":"88050","dateCreated":"1551389487","dateModified":"1551389487"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14277","author":"akshjain.jain74","id":"88048","dateCreated":"1551388596","dateModified":"1551388596"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14274","author":"akshjain.jain74","id":"88039","dateCreated":"1551376882","dateModified":"1551376882"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14273","author":"akshjain.jain74","id":"88038","dateCreated":"1551373745","dateModified":"1551373745"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14272","author":"akshjain.jain74","id":"88037","dateCreated":"1551373367","dateModified":"1551373367"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14271","author":"akshjain.jain74","id":"88036","dateCreated":"1551373151","dateModified":"1551373151"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Ya I am sending that  just trying to find out the file","author":"akshjain.jain74","id":"87909","dateCreated":"1551191027","dateModified":"1551191027"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This patch does not changes any code. It only changes some test output. You need to change the error message in the code.","author":"pulkit","id":"87908","dateCreated":"1551190913","dateModified":"1551190913"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14244","author":"akshjain.jain74","id":"87894","dateCreated":"1551173448","dateModified":"1551173448"}],"dateCreated":"1551173448","dateModified":"1588061931","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"6123","callsign":"HG","title":"similar: add condition to avoid Zerodivisonerror in function _score() (issue6099)","author":"akshjain.jain74","summary":"","testPlan":"","lineCount":"4","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["durin42","baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","marmoute","av6","pulkit","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"126758","dateCreated":"1588061929","dateModified":"1588061929"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"126757","dateCreated":"1588061929","dateModified":"1588061929"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Gentle ping on this. This has been around for a long time, what's the status of it?","author":"marmoute","id":"117292","dateCreated":"1579799599","dateModified":"1579799599"},{"type":"inline","comment":"yes actually \ud83d\ude05  i did'nt noticed that ","replyTo":"89412","isNewFile":"1","line":"68","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/similar.py","diffId":"14487","author":"akshjain.jain74","id":"89432","dateCreated":"1552659675","dateModified":"1552659675"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14508","author":"akshjain.jain74","id":"89430","dateCreated":"1552659596","dateModified":"1552659596"},{"type":"comment","comment":"thanks for the review\n","author":"akshjain.jain74","id":"89422","dateCreated":"1552658279","dateModified":"1552658279"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6123#89410, @pulkit wrote:\n> Can you try to add a test for this?\n\nyes i can definitely try to add test for this ","author":"akshjain.jain74","id":"89421","dateCreated":"1552658267","dateModified":"1552658267"},{"type":"inline","comment":"no need for this else. you can `return 0` without else.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"68","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/similar.py","diffId":"14487","author":"pulkit","id":"89412","dateCreated":"1552657477","dateModified":"1552657477"},{"type":"inline","comment":"we can do `if lengths:` here.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"66","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/similar.py","diffId":"14487","author":"pulkit","id":"89411","dateCreated":"1552657477","dateModified":"1552657477"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Can you try to add a test for this?","author":"pulkit","id":"89410","dateCreated":"1552657477","dateModified":"1552657477"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14487","author":"akshjain.jain74","id":"89272","dateCreated":"1552508232","dateModified":"1552508232"},{"type":"comment","comment":"actually  i am not getting what can be the proper topic for this :(","author":"akshjain.jain74","id":"89249","dateCreated":"1552501010","dateModified":"1552501010"},{"type":"comment","comment":"sorry for that , but can you tell me in what condition this function will return none value?","author":"akshjain.jain74","id":"89248","dateCreated":"1552500860","dateModified":"1552500860"},{"type":"inline","comment":"`None > 1` is still an issue, see my comment above.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"66","lineLength":"1","path":"mercurial\/similar.py","diffId":"14482","author":"av6","id":"89240","dateCreated":"1552500162","dateModified":"1552500162"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Okay, let's go over #1 in https:\/\/www.mercurial-scm.org\/wiki\/ContributingChanges#Submission_checklist once more. If you want to know what a good \"topic\" is, look at what other people do. How patches that get accepted generally look. How bug-fixing commits are worded.\n\nSecondly, about that capitalization. I'm sorry if this is some sort of silly autocorrect that's doing it for you, I really hope you're not writing commit messages on a phone.","author":"av6","id":"89239","dateCreated":"1552500162","dateModified":"1552500162"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14482","author":"akshjain.jain74","id":"89237","dateCreated":"1552498479","dateModified":"1552498479"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Sorry for the various mistake\n I will correct everything in an hour thanks","author":"akshjain.jain74","id":"89222","dateCreated":"1552470438","dateModified":"1552470438"},{"type":"inline","comment":"This returns None in some cases, and code that uses `_score()` and `score()` tries to compare it to an integer. In Python3 `None > 1` raises TypeError.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"67","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/similar.py","diffId":"14477","author":"av6","id":"89221","dateCreated":"1552469028","dateModified":"1552469028"},{"type":"inline","comment":"This is some... interesting syntax. Is this valid Python?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"66","lineLength":"1","path":"mercurial\/similar.py","diffId":"14477","author":"av6","id":"89220","dateCreated":"1552468824","dateModified":"1552468824"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I find it troubling that we now have contributors that don't follow #1 in https:\/\/www.mercurial-scm.org\/wiki\/ContributingChanges#Submission_checklist. Potentially #4 too (as Pulkit commented).\n\nSeriously, the title is terrible at describing what this patch fixes and where. The commit message could briefly mention why\/when this condition is even required.","author":"av6","id":"89219","dateCreated":"1552468824","dateModified":"1552468824"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Oh sorry ,my bad  I think that is by mistake I will correct it now\nIthink while committing I added that file by mistake","author":"akshjain.jain74","id":"89217","dateCreated":"1552468624","dateModified":"1552468624"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Is this change required for this patch?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"1127","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/histedit.py","diffId":"14477","author":"pulkit","id":"89214","dateCreated":"1552467285","dateModified":"1552467285"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14477","author":"akshjain.jain74","id":"89176","dateCreated":"1552414170","dateModified":"1552414170"}],"dateCreated":"1552414170","dateModified":"1588061930","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"6027","callsign":"HG","title":"mq: make unshelve to apply on modified mq patch (issue4318)","author":"navaneeth.suresh","summary":"unshelve wasn't working on a modified mq patch. I added checks for\nnot aborting on a modified mq patch in both rebase and mq.\n\nChecking `repo.vfs.exists('unshelverebasestate')` works in rebase,\nnot in mq. I used `cmdutil.unfinishedstates` to find `shelvedstate`\nin mq.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"29","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["martinvonz","baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","marmoute","yuja","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"126754","dateCreated":"1588061928","dateModified":"1588061928"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"126753","dateCreated":"1588061928","dateModified":"1588061928"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Waht'a sup on this. Seems to be open for a long while.","author":"marmoute","id":"117296","dateCreated":"1579799857","dateModified":"1579799857"},{"type":"comment","comment":"> It doesn't make sense to check the existence of 'shelvedstate' in a static\n> table.\n> \n> Can't we somehow get around the mq in a similar way to shelve.getcommitfunc()?\n> I don't think it's good idea to rely on state files saved on disk.\n\nI felt that the only workaround to stop aborting unshelve on a modified mq patch should be adding a check on `mq.abortifwdirpatched()`. Will try to investigate in `shelve.getcommitfunc()` for sure. Thanks.","author":"navaneeth.suresh","id":"89928","dateCreated":"1553624502","dateModified":"1553624502"},{"type":"comment","comment":"> --- a\/hgext\/mq.py\n> +++ b\/hgext\/mq.py\n> @@ -3518,7 +3518,10 @@\n>                  delattr(self.unfiltered(), r'mq')\n>  \n>          def abortifwdirpatched(self, errmsg, force=False):\n> -            if self.mq.applied and self.mq.checkapplied and not force:\n> +            shelveinprogress = any('shelvedstate' in state\n> +                                    for state in cmdutil.unfinishedstates)\n> +            if (self.mq.applied and self.mq.checkapplied and not force and\n> +                not shelveinprogress):\n\nIt doesn't make sense to check the existence of 'shelvedstate' in a static\ntable.\n\nCan't we somehow get around the mq in a similar way to shelve.getcommitfunc()?\nI don't think it's good idea to rely on state files saved on disk.","author":"yuja","id":"89919","dateCreated":"1553552983","dateModified":"1553552983"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Gentle ping for review.","author":"navaneeth.suresh","id":"89906","dateCreated":"1553450952","dateModified":"1553450952"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14400","author":"navaneeth.suresh","id":"88740","dateCreated":"1552069564","dateModified":"1552069564"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Ping for review.","author":"navaneeth.suresh","id":"88530","dateCreated":"1551851154","dateModified":"1551851154"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14245","author":"navaneeth.suresh","id":"87900","dateCreated":"1551183856","dateModified":"1551183856"}],"dateCreated":"1551183856","dateModified":"1588061929","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"7716","callsign":"HG","title":"rust-discovery: partial switch to typestate pattern","author":"gracinet","summary":"The `PartialDiscovery` object owns two data fields that are\nlazily evaluated: the set of undecided revisions, and the\nchildren cache. That laziness is known to be essential for\nperformance.\n\nIn the previous version, we were using `Option<T>`, which led\nus to methods such as `ensure_undecided()` followed by calls to\n`self.undecided.as_ref().unwrap()`, as it was the simplest way\nto avoid reference sharing problems, but that wasn't\nsatisfying. Human readers knew that panicking was indeed\nimpossible, but that wasn't enforced by the compiler.\n\nWe had something similar yet less pervasive with the early\nrelease of `target_heads`.\n\nThe reviewer, Kevin Cox, then suggested to use a code pattern\nknown as typestate: different types to represent the successive\nstages, with the second one always having an undecided set.\n\nThis is what we are doing here.  Now we have two state types:\n`OnlyCommon` and `WithUndecided`.\nOnly the first has the `target_heads` member; only the second\nhas the `undecided` member.\n\nIt makes the code a bit longer, because we have to make\n`PartialDiscovery` a wrapper enum for identical consumption\nwithin hg-cpython and reexpose the public interface.\nBut it makes the inner code more focused, clearer and\nbetter checked by the compiler. A few further simplifications\nwill be made in following changesets thanks to this.\n\nA key point that we didn't know how to solve\nin the first version was the in-place mutation of that wrapper\nenum, provided by the `mutate_undecided()` method.\n\nThis is partial because we don't address the children cache.\nWe'll do that in a follow-up also.\n\nAlso some methods and doc-comments have been kept on the inner\nstructs for readability of this changesets, but they will\nbe factorized on the wrapper enum in a next move","testPlan":"","lineCount":"381","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["martinvonz"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","marmoute","martinvonz","Alphare","durin42","kevincox","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7716#126417, @marmoute wrote:\n> cc @Alphare is this still relevant ?\n\nIt is. @gracinet told me he would want to come back to this series when he has time. Since it's a cleanup series it's not urgent in any way, but we would all like to have this upstream some day.","author":"Alphare","id":"126506","dateCreated":"1587628319","dateModified":"1587628319"},{"type":"comment","comment":"cc @Alphare is this still relevant ?","author":"marmoute","id":"126417","dateCreated":"1587570881","dateModified":"1587570881"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I'm gonna give it a try, yes. About the namings, I'm thinking of `<Cheap>` and `<Expensive>`. It doesn't describe the contents, but it's really clear about the intent.","author":"gracinet","id":"114210","dateCreated":"1577622485","dateModified":"1577622485"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7716#114043, @gracinet wrote:\n> @martinvonz yes, I've thinked of it after I made this one, but somehow I thought this was enough for a first try.\n\nIt seems like it would be a lot of churn to take this patch and then a follow-up that rewrites it. I'd be much happier to take a patch that cleaner version right away (and it sounds like we both think it would be cleaner).\n\n> \n> Yes, we could have `PartialDiscovery<Start>`,  and `PartialDiscovery<Computed>`, with  `Start` being a pure marker,  and `Computed` actually holding the undecided set and the children cache (anticipating on a later changeset), that would be more elegant and it would better organize the boiler plate.\n> \n> Don't hesitate if you come up with better namings.\n\nI haven't even reviewed in enough detail to know what the states represent, so I don't have any suggestions yet :)","author":"martinvonz","id":"114044","dateCreated":"1577486308","dateModified":"1577486308"},{"type":"comment","comment":"@martinvonz yes, I've thinked of it after I made this one, but somehow I thought this was enough for a first try.\n\nYes, we could have `PartialDiscovery<Start>`,  and `PartialDiscovery<Computed>`, with  `Start` being a pure marker,  and `Computed` actually holding the undecided set and the children cache (anticipating on a later changeset), that would be more elegant and it would better organize the boiler plate.\n\nDon't hesitate if you come up with better namings.","author":"gracinet","id":"114043","dateCreated":"1577485532","dateModified":"1577485532"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Did you consider encoding the state in a type parameter to `PartialDiscovery`? I think that would make the call sites simpler. See the last variation on http:\/\/cliffle.com\/blog\/rust-typestate\/ for what I mean.","author":"martinvonz","id":"113817","dateCreated":"1577468534","dateModified":"1577468534"},{"type":"reject","author":"martinvonz","id":"113816","dateCreated":"1577468534","dateModified":"1577468534"},{"type":"comment","comment":"@durin42 this Diffrential and its descendants are what I've told you about in our latest chat: implementing suggestions by @kevincox for a much cleaner an robust code.\nI intend to provide the upcoming rust-nodemap series using the same kind of pattern. I believe @Alphare wants to clean up Dirstate related code in similar ways.","author":"gracinet","id":"113739","dateCreated":"1577196081","dateModified":"1577196081"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18924","author":"gracinet","id":"113682","dateCreated":"1577195389","dateModified":"1577195389"}],"dateCreated":"1577195389","dateModified":"1587628319","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8457","callsign":"HG","title":"[RFC] metadataonlyctx: demonstrate an error reusing manifest nodes","author":"mharbison72","summary":"Don't queue this, it's for demo purposes only.\n\nThe structure of the revisions being submitted here is admittedly insane, but I\nstumbled into this trying to test for another issue.  Since I don't see anything\nobviously wrong, I'm wondering if fix\/absorb\/etc would have similar issues here.\nI converted the RuntimeError to a message so that the operation completes and\ndoesn't rollback the transaction.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"842","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","marmoute","Kwan","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"II recommend filling up a bug with a link to this Diff.","author":"marmoute","id":"126505","dateCreated":"1587589350","dateModified":"1587589350"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8457#126469, @marmoute wrote:\n> For demo purpose only \u2192 getting it out of review. Put it back in review if I am wrong.\n\nCorrect.  But I would like eyes on it because I have no clue what the problem is, and it might affect other extensions.","author":"mharbison72","id":"126502","dateCreated":"1587577837","dateModified":"1587577837"},{"type":"comment","comment":"For demo purpose only \u2192 getting it out of review. Put it back in review if I am wrong.","author":"marmoute","id":"126469","dateCreated":"1587572200","dateModified":"1587572200"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"126468","dateCreated":"1587572200","dateModified":"1587572200"},{"type":"update","diffId":"21153","author":"mharbison72","id":"126129","dateCreated":"1587136741","dateModified":"1587136741"}],"dateCreated":"1587136741","dateModified":"1587589350","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8281","callsign":"HG","title":"narrow: escape includepats\/excludepats when sending over the wire","author":"spectral","summary":"The escaping chosen was RFC 4180-like in that it wraps the values that are to be\nescaped in double quote (`\"`) characters, and doubles any embedded double quote\ncharacters. It differs from RFC 4180 in what is escaped; the escaping is only\napplied if the item contains a `,` character or starts with a `\"` character. RFC\n4180 states that `\"` characters embedded in a value that isn't escaped are not\nallowed, and it also states that \\r and \\n characters should trigger an item to\nbe escaped.\n\nThe differences from RFC 4180 are intentional:\n- the include and exclude patterns can't contain a `,` character today (that's\n  what's being fixed), so surrounding them in `\"` characters won't really change\n  anything.\n- the include and exclude patterns today can't start with a `\"` character, so by\n  *not* escaping all strings that have an embedded `\"` unless they start with a\n  `\"` character (for future compatibility), we maintain BC.\n- the include and exclude patterns aren't multi-line, so \\r and \\n are\n  irrelevant (and technically allowed in the patterns, though Mercurial is\n  generally unable to reason about filenames that contain newlines).\n\nAlternatives considered:\n\nFull RFC 4180 encoding and decoding:\n- this would have been a breaking change for any include\/exclude\n  pattern that includes a `\"` in the name if a new client talks to an old\n  server. This is quite unlikely to cause problems in practice, but was easy to\n  avoid.\n- this would have required the decoder to handle \\r and \\n characters specially,\n  which would complicate it significantly.\n- the `csv` module in Python would have provided this to us, but it requires\n  `str` on python3, and we only have bytes. It's not generically safe to convert\n  these patterns to `str`, though perhaps roundtripping the string through\n  fsencode and fsdecode would have been acceptable?\n\nOther escaping mechanisms:\n- the original version of this change did use a different (home-grown) escaping\n  mechanism. This received pushback during review.\n- using \\ escaping (`\\`->`\\\\`, and `,` -> `\\,`) is annoying to decode, though\n  overall pretty similar to what we have to do here. It would introduce\n  significantly more changes for cross-platform and cross-version compatibility,\n  however, as a server that encounters a string with `\\,` can't know if the\n  client is escaping a comma, or if the client is old and the path ends in a\n  backslash (among other ambiguities).\n- using the existing batch escaping would likely have worked, but would\n  introduce cross-version ambiguities if any path contained a `:` character\n  followed by one of the four characters used in that escaping mechanism. The\n  author does not know if their deployment has any paths with these character\n  sequences in them, so decided to err on the side of caution.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"274","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["durin42","martinvonz","marmoute"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","marmoute","mharbison72","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"If I understood the situation correctly, a rewrite in planned.","author":"marmoute","id":"126457","dateCreated":"1587571865","dateModified":"1587571865"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"126456","dateCreated":"1587571865","dateModified":"1587571865"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8281#124246, @spectral wrote:\n>>>! In D8281#124129, @durin42 wrote:\n>>>>! In D8281#124058, @marmoute wrote:\n>>> Since narrow is still experimental, I don't think we should try too hard for backward compatibility. We could introduce a new end-point for a new encoding and drop the old one in a couple of version.\n>> \n>> +0, honestly. I won't require it, but I'd really rather we shaved this yak _now_ rather than when narrow has even more users.\n> \n> I'm getting a bit frustrated with how much time I've spent on this, made worse by the fact that I agree with everything everyone's saying and so it's not like I'm frustrated at the review process, just how slow I've been at accomplishing this.\n\nI know the feeling, thanks a lot for revisiting you original plan.\n\n> \n> So, before I go down another rabbit hole, here's what I'm thinking:\n> \n> - Server emits a new capability `narrow-exp-1-escaped` (in addition to the current `narrow-exp-1`, this is not replacing the existing capability)\n> - wireprototypes's map will change these items from csv to csv.escaped \n> - Compatible clients will detect this capability from the server and send items of type csv.escaped during getbundle with keys like `<previousname>.escaped` (ex: `include.escaped`). If the server doesn't support csv.escaped, the client sends with the old names (unescaped).\n> - The escaping will be urllibcompat.quote\n> - The server will strip the `.escaped` suffix on the keys, split on comma, and urllibcompat.unquote the individual items\n\nThis looks overall good to me.\n\n> - I'm *not* expecting to do anything about `\\` -> `\/` conversion.\n\nDoes this means the client side is expected to enforce using `\/` as the directory separator ?\n\n> Since these are part of `getbundle`, I haven't found a way of doing this that's not one of:\n> - a custom escaping mechanism that's backwards compatible\n> - adding a capability and renaming the keys that are sent (so the server can tell when it needs to unescape)\n> - having the client always send duplicate items (i.e. send `include` and `include.escaped`). I'm not even sure that older servers would tolerate receiving keys they aren't expecting.\n\nIt would not work. Server would reject unknown arguments to `getbundle`.\n\n> - having the client only escape when necessary (i.e. it includes a comma), and then always send the path as include.escaped (which runs into the problem of old servers rejecting).\n\nIn my opinion, I don't think we get much benefit of conditional escaping. So keeping things simple seems better.\n\n> - having the server always unescape and the client always escape. This breaks the server's ability to interact with older clients that aren't escaping (which we'll need to support for at least a week or two).\n\nAs much as I think we don't need strong BC on narrow because it is experimental, have a couple of version that can still speak to each other is preferable.\n\n> For the non-getbundle parts (I think the wireproto command is 'widen'), we can easily make a widen2 or something, but it's probably easier to just keep the same command name and do the same thing as in getbundle: detect the capability, send as foo.escaped if supported.\n\n","author":"marmoute","id":"124269","dateCreated":"1584764191","dateModified":"1584764191"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8281#124246, @spectral wrote:\n> - I'm *not* expecting to do anything about `\\` -> `\/` conversion. \n\nSo would there be some interoperability issue between Windows and not-Windows if paths aren't pconverted, if paths can also come from the server as Martin mentioned?  Is there anything here that makes it more difficult to pconvert in the future?  (I assume it only came up in the first place to allow the custom escaping.  I understand your frustration, so I'm not looking to sign you up for more work.  But I only know about narrow from a very high conceptual level, so I figure I might as well ask now and save this info for later.)","author":"mharbison72","id":"124249","dateCreated":"1584758666","dateModified":"1584758666"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8281#124247, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>! In D8281#124246, @spectral wrote: \n>> - Server emits a new capability `narrow-exp-1-escaped` (in addition to the current `narrow-exp-1`, this is not replacing the existing capability)\n> \n> nit: I *think* the \"1\" in the name was supposed to be a version number, so the new capability's name would be `narrow-exp-2`.\n\nYes, I had assumed that as well. This isn't really a new version of the protocol, though, just a minor tweak, and it's primarily to the 'csv' type used in getbundle (see the current version of this patch that adds 'qcsv' for the actual locations it's used). Honestly I went back and forth between announcing it as `getbundle-csv-escaped` and something related to narrow (and ended up on narrow, as you see, since while it's generically useful besides narrow, nothing else needs it today, and future things wouldn't need this to be announced forever - they'll always have used foo.escaped and been transmitted as escaped).\n\n> Maybe no one uses the \"widen\" command so we don't even need to worry about compatibility there?\n\nI don't know how often it's used :) I just know that there's something *not* getbundle-related in narrowwirepeer.py (looks like it's called `narrow_widen` that needed to be modified or else the tests wouldn't pass. I honestly don't even know if we're using it internally at Google right now. If not, that's fewer things to change, which I'm OK with :)\n\n","author":"spectral","id":"124248","dateCreated":"1584757570","dateModified":"1584757570"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8281#124246, @spectral wrote:\n>>>! In D8281#124129, @durin42 wrote:\n>>>>! In D8281#124058, @marmoute wrote:\n>>> Since narrow is still experimental, I don't think we should try too hard for backward compatibility. We could introduce a new end-point for a new encoding and drop the old one in a couple of version.\n>> \n>> +0, honestly. I won't require it, but I'd really rather we shaved this yak _now_ rather than when narrow has even more users.\n> \n> I'm getting a bit frustrated with how much time I've spent on this, made worse by the fact that I agree with everything everyone's saying and so it's not like I'm frustrated at the review process, just how slow I've been at accomplishing this. \n> \n> So, before I go down another rabbit hole, here's what I'm thinking:\n> \n> - Server emits a new capability `narrow-exp-1-escaped` (in addition to the current `narrow-exp-1`, this is not replacing the existing capability)\n\nnit: I *think* the \"1\" in the name was supposed to be a version number, so the new capability's name would be `narrow-exp-2`.\n\n> - wireprototypes's map will change these items from csv to csv.escaped \n> - Compatible clients will detect this capability from the server and send items of type csv.escaped during getbundle with keys like `<previousname>.escaped` (ex: `include.escaped`). If the server doesn't support csv.escaped, the client sends with the old names (unescaped).\n> - The escaping will be urllibcompat.quote\n> - The server will strip the `.escaped` suffix on the keys, split on comma, and urllibcompat.unquote the individual items\n> - I'm *not* expecting to do anything about `\\` -> `\/` conversion. \n\nThis all sounds good to me.\n\n> \n> Since these are part of `getbundle`, I haven't found a way of doing this that's not one of:\n> - a custom escaping mechanism that's backwards compatible\n> - adding a capability and renaming the keys that are sent (so the server can tell when it needs to unescape)\n> - having the client always send duplicate items (i.e. send `include` and `include.escaped`). I'm not even sure that older servers would tolerate receiving keys they aren't expecting.\n> - having the client only escape when necessary (i.e. it includes a comma), and then always send the path as include.escaped (which runs into the problem of old servers rejecting).\n> - having the server always unescape and the client always escape. This breaks the server's ability to interact with older clients that aren't escaping (which we'll need to support for at least a week or two).\n> \n> For the non-getbundle parts (I think the wireproto command is 'widen'), we can easily make a widen2 or something, but it's probably easier to just keep the same command name and do the same thing as in getbundle: detect the capability, send as foo.escaped if supported.\n\nMaybe no one uses the \"widen\" command so we don't even need to worry about compatibility there?\n","author":"martinvonz","id":"124247","dateCreated":"1584747164","dateModified":"1584747164"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8281#124129, @durin42 wrote:\n>>>! In D8281#124058, @marmoute wrote:\n>> Since narrow is still experimental, I don't think we should try too hard for backward compatibility. We could introduce a new end-point for a new encoding and drop the old one in a couple of version.\n> \n> +0, honestly. I won't require it, but I'd really rather we shaved this yak _now_ rather than when narrow has even more users.\n\nI'm getting a bit frustrated with how much time I've spent on this, made worse by the fact that I agree with everything everyone's saying and so it's not like I'm frustrated at the review process, just how slow I've been at accomplishing this. \n\nSo, before I go down another rabbit hole, here's what I'm thinking:\n\n- Server emits a new capability `narrow-exp-1-escaped` (in addition to the current `narrow-exp-1`, this is not replacing the existing capability)\n- wireprototypes's map will change these items from csv to csv.escaped \n- Compatible clients will detect this capability from the server and send items of type csv.escaped during getbundle with keys like `<previousname>.escaped` (ex: `include.escaped`). If the server doesn't support csv.escaped, the client sends with the old names (unescaped).\n- The escaping will be urllibcompat.quote\n- The server will strip the `.escaped` suffix on the keys, split on comma, and urllibcompat.unquote the individual items\n- I'm *not* expecting to do anything about `\\` -> `\/` conversion. \n\nSince these are part of `getbundle`, I haven't found a way of doing this that's not one of:\n- a custom escaping mechanism that's backwards compatible\n- adding a capability and renaming the keys that are sent (so the server can tell when it needs to unescape)\n- having the client always send duplicate items (i.e. send `include` and `include.escaped`). I'm not even sure that older servers would tolerate receiving keys they aren't expecting.\n- having the client only escape when necessary (i.e. it includes a comma), and then always send the path as include.escaped (which runs into the problem of old servers rejecting).\n- having the server always unescape and the client always escape. This breaks the server's ability to interact with older clients that aren't escaping (which we'll need to support for at least a week or two).\n\nFor the non-getbundle parts (I think the wireproto command is 'widen'), we can easily make a widen2 or something, but it's probably easier to just keep the same command name and do the same thing as in getbundle: detect the capability, send as foo.escaped if supported.\n\n","author":"spectral","id":"124246","dateCreated":"1584745742","dateModified":"1584745742"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8281#124058, @marmoute wrote:\n> Since narrow is still experimental, I don't think we should try too hard for backward compatibility. We could introduce a new end-point for a new encoding and drop the old one in a couple of version.\n\n+0, honestly. I won't require it, but I'd really rather we shaved this yak _now_ rather than when narrow has even more users.","author":"durin42","id":"124129","dateCreated":"1584719870","dateModified":"1584719870"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Since narrow is still experimental, I don't think we should try too hard for backward compatibility. We could introduce a new end-point for a new encoding and drop the old one in a couple of version.\n\nI am really not enthousiatic with having our own version of an encoding. Because this means extra overhead for people working on this in the future. Especially if it needs to be reimplemented (eg: in rust). If we drop the hard BC constraint on this, like starting from scratch. What would be your (@spectral ) encoding of choice ? could we got for something simple but widely available like url-encode ?","author":"marmoute","id":"124058","dateCreated":"1584660947","dateModified":"1584660947"},{"type":"update","diffId":"20819","author":"spectral","id":"123958","dateCreated":"1584482355","dateModified":"1584482355"},{"type":"update","diffId":"20818","author":"spectral","id":"123957","dateCreated":"1584481806","dateModified":"1584481806"},{"type":"update","diffId":"20813","author":"spectral","id":"123932","dateCreated":"1584480325","dateModified":"1584480325"},{"type":"update","diffId":"20789","author":"spectral","id":"123805","dateCreated":"1584152998","dateModified":"1584152998"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8281#123659, @mharbison72 wrote:\n>>>! In D8281#123625, @spectral wrote:\n>>>>! In D8281#123621, @mharbison72 wrote:\n>>> The Windows path changes seem like a good idea.\n>>> \n>>> Would quoting paths with commas eliminate the need for custom escaping?  I don't feel strongly about it, but custom escaping always feels weird to me.  (I fact, a coworker did some homebrew escaping for CSV files a few days ago, but I forget how it ultimately ended up.)\n>> \n>> Let me play with that a bit, I think it'll work and be detectable on the server since the first character can't currently be a double-quote, so there wouldn't really be any BC issues aside from the pconvert (which wouldn't be as important anymore, but still probably a good idea?)\n> \n> I haven't played with narrow yet, so I'm not sure of the context.  Are these user input paths that would end up being ignored\/rejected if a Windows user used `path\\to\\file` when talking to a Unix server?  Or are these stored in a tracked file? (Which I think could still cause problems.)  I can't think of a good reason to stay inconsistent, and it is still experimental, so it still seems like a good idea while we still can fix it.\n\nThey are stored in .hg\/store\/narrowspec. They usually get into that file via `hg clone --narrow --include` and similar, but the server may also send them. We should ideally do the conversion early when the user provides them. I think the pconvert in this patch is to handle existing repos as well as possible.","author":"martinvonz","id":"123662","dateCreated":"1584112673","dateModified":"1584112673"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8281#123625, @spectral wrote:\n>>>! In D8281#123621, @mharbison72 wrote:\n>> The Windows path changes seem like a good idea.\n>> \n>> Would quoting paths with commas eliminate the need for custom escaping?  I don't feel strongly about it, but custom escaping always feels weird to me.  (I fact, a coworker did some homebrew escaping for CSV files a few days ago, but I forget how it ultimately ended up.)\n> \n> Let me play with that a bit, I think it'll work and be detectable on the server since the first character can't currently be a double-quote, so there wouldn't really be any BC issues aside from the pconvert (which wouldn't be as important anymore, but still probably a good idea?)\n\nI haven't played with narrow yet, so I'm not sure of the context.  Are these user input paths that would end up being ignored\/rejected if a Windows user used `path\\to\\file` when talking to a Unix server?  Or are these stored in a tracked file? (Which I think could still cause problems.)  I can't think of a good reason to stay inconsistent, and it is still experimental, so it still seems like a good idea while we still can fix it.","author":"mharbison72","id":"123659","dateCreated":"1584107877","dateModified":"1584107877"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Let's name it `decode_csv_paths` now that `_` are permitted. It woul dbe easier to read.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"220","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/wireprototypes.py","diffId":"20767","author":"marmoute","id":"123652","dateCreated":"1584089916","dateModified":"1584089916"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Let's name it `encode_csv_paths` now that `_` are permitted. It woul dbe easier to read.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"183","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/wireprototypes.py","diffId":"20767","author":"marmoute","id":"123651","dateCreated":"1584089916","dateModified":"1584089916"},{"type":"comment","comment":"The escaping scheme is a bit puzzling to me. Coudl we use something more standard for this ? (like urlencode).\n\n(requesting change of the function name. Now that we can, lets make them readable)","author":"marmoute","id":"123650","dateCreated":"1584089916","dateModified":"1584089916"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"123649","dateCreated":"1584089916","dateModified":"1584089916"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8281#123625, @spectral wrote:\n>>>! In D8281#123621, @mharbison72 wrote:\n>> The Windows path changes seem like a good idea.\n>> \n>> Would quoting paths with commas eliminate the need for custom escaping?  I don't feel strongly about it, but custom escaping always feels weird to me.  (I fact, a coworker did some homebrew escaping for CSV files a few days ago, but I forget how it ultimately ended up.)\n> \n> Let me play with that a bit, I think it'll work and be detectable on the server since the first character can't currently be a double-quote, so there wouldn't really be any BC issues aside from the pconvert (which wouldn't be as important anymore, but still probably a good idea?)\n\nIt's a little weird to me that there's no step corresponding to `pconvert()` in the decoding function. Maybe we should do the `pconvert()` step outside `encodecsvpaths()`, maybe in `narrowspec.normalizepattern()`? However, that would make it impossible to have backslashes in paths in the narrowspec on Windows even after this patch (because they would always be converted to slashes), including narrowspecs returned from the server. However^2, maybe it wouldn't work to check out such paths on Windows anyway, so it doesn't really matter (so it's fine to call `pconvert()`)?","author":"martinvonz","id":"123640","dateCreated":"1584078474","dateModified":"1584078474"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8281#123621, @mharbison72 wrote:\n> The Windows path changes seem like a good idea.\n> \n> Would quoting paths with commas eliminate the need for custom escaping?  I don't feel strongly about it, but custom escaping always feels weird to me.  (I fact, a coworker did some homebrew escaping for CSV files a few days ago, but I forget how it ultimately ended up.)\n\nLet me play with that a bit, I think it'll work and be detectable on the server since the first character can't currently be a double-quote, so there wouldn't really be any BC issues aside from the pconvert (which wouldn't be as important anymore, but still probably a good idea?)","author":"spectral","id":"123625","dateCreated":"1584077397","dateModified":"1584077397"},{"type":"update","diffId":"20767","author":"spectral","id":"123624","dateCreated":"1584076873","dateModified":"1584076873"},{"type":"comment","comment":"The Windows path changes seem like a good idea.\n\nWould quoting paths with commas eliminate the need for custom escaping?  I don't feel strongly about it, but custom escaping always feels weird to me.  (I fact, a coworker did some homebrew escaping for CSV files a few days ago, but I forget how it ultimately ended up.)","author":"mharbison72","id":"123621","dateCreated":"1584076400","dateModified":"1584076400"},{"type":"update","diffId":"20765","author":"spectral","id":"123606","dateCreated":"1584072745","dateModified":"1584072745"}],"dateCreated":"1584072745","dateModified":"1587571865","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"3444","callsign":"HG","title":"tests: comprehensively test exit handling","author":"indygreg","summary":"Rust `hg` currently has some test failures around exit handling.\nThis commit establishes some centralized tests around exit handling so\nthat we can unify the behavior of our Rust frontend and `python`.\n\nThere are some added tests that use a value other than an integer\nor None for the exit code. The docs for sys.exit() say such a value\nis allowed. However, Mercurial currently crashes in this case. Upcoming\ncommits will teach Mercurial to handle these values.\n\nThis does introduce a few Python 3 test failures. However, this test\nalready has a few failures. And the failures being introduced should\nmostly go away with subsequent commits. So I think this is acceptable.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"91","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["durin42","marmoute"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","marmoute","durin42","yuja","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"Baymax does not catch stuff in `Accepted` state, but this diff is over 2 years old, so resubmit if still relevant.","author":"marmoute","id":"126431","dateCreated":"1587571085","dateModified":"1587571085"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"126430","dateCreated":"1587571085","dateModified":"1587571085"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This LG, esp with D3445 which appears to be its child, but D3445 still needs rebased AFAICT","author":"durin42","id":"57781","dateCreated":"1527794332","dateModified":"1527794332"},{"type":"accept","author":"durin42","id":"57779","dateCreated":"1527794332","dateModified":"1527794332"},{"type":"comment","comment":">   > I generally like the direction of this series, but I think there's no point\n>   >  to extend Mercurial's exit code handling to support all weird Python types.\n>   >\n>   > Only ints and (None for 0) are ever valid.\n>   \n>   \n>   The reason I did this is because from the context or `rhg`, we don't have CPython's default exit handling to fall back on. Our choices are:\n>   \n>   1. Reimplement CPython's exit\/error handling in Rust\n>   2. Reimplement CPython's exit\/error handling in Python in dispatch [so the end state is more well-defined]\n>   3. Do something crude in `rhg` when we hit special cases that CPython would normally deal with.\n>   \n>   Since extensions could do weird things, I figured 2 was the best option.\n\nI don't fully understand the situation in `rhg`, but maybe we can instead\nfix `scmutil.callcatch()` to either translate non-int SystemExit to integer\nor raise ProgrammingError as a bad use of sys.exit() in hg. No SystemExit\nshould be raised outside of the callcatch().\n\nI'm against allowing command functions to return any objects other than\nint or None because it's useless.","author":"yuja","id":"56045","dateCreated":"1526104337","dateModified":"1526104337"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D3444#54922, @yuja wrote:\n> I generally like the direction of this series, but I think there's no point\n> to extend Mercurial's exit code handling to support all weird Python types.\n> \n> Only ints and (None for 0) are ever valid.\n\nThe reason I did this is because from the context or `rhg`, we don't have CPython's default exit handling to fall back on. Our choices are:\n\n1. Reimplement CPython's exit\/error handling in Rust\n2. Reimplement CPython's exit\/error handling in Python in dispatch [so the end state is more well-defined]\n3. Do something crude in `rhg` when we hit special cases that CPython would normally deal with.\n\nSince extensions could do weird things, I figured 2 was the best option.\n\nBut I'll take a look at this series again and re-evaluate if we can simplify things. I just thought I'd brain dump on what I'm thinking.","author":"indygreg","id":"56014","dateCreated":"1526097317","dateModified":"1526097317"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I generally like the direction of this series, but I think there's no point\nto extend Mercurial's exit code handling to support all weird Python types.\n\nOnly ints and (None for 0) are ever valid.","author":"yuja","id":"54923","dateCreated":"1525609756","dateModified":"1525609756"},{"type":"update","diffId":"8459","author":"indygreg","id":"54808","dateCreated":"1525579871","dateModified":"1525579871"}],"dateCreated":"1525579871","dateModified":"1587571085","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"2873","callsign":"HG","title":"remotenames: add functionality to override -B flag of push","author":"pulkit","summary":"This patch adds a new config option which can be used to override the `-B` flag\nof push command. If config is set to true, changesets will be pushed to that\nbookmark on the server. This is equivalent to `--to` flag of remotenames and\ninfinitepush.\n\nAfter this patch if config is set to true, the behavior will be:\n\n  * Normal push without -B flag: no behavior change\n  * specifying one bookmark using -B flag: changesets will be pushed to that\n        bookmark on the server, as explained above. Bookmark pushed will be on\n        the head most revision of the changesets pushed.\n  * specifying multiple bookmarks using -B flag: no behavior change, the same\n        behavior as it's today without this config option\n  * specifying multiple topologcial heads to push: no behvaior change\n\nThere needs some extra logic to update the remotenames state locally after the\npush since we know that the bookmark will now be at a known updated location.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"356","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["indygreg","marmoute"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","marmoute","smf","indygreg","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"Baymax does not catch stuff in `Accepted` state, but this diff is over 2 years old, so resubmit if still relevant.","author":"marmoute","id":"126426","dateCreated":"1587571035","dateModified":"1587571035"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"126425","dateCreated":"1587571035","dateModified":"1587571035"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D2873#52100, @indygreg wrote:\n>>>! In D2873#52025, @smf wrote:\n>>>>! In D2873#52021, @indygreg wrote:\n>>> Looks good!\n>> \n>> I'm very heavily against this direction. Changing the behavior of push (even in this extension) is something I've always considered outside the scope of remotenames. Having another extension that changes push behavior (e.g. bookmark-push) is where I think this should go so that remotenames is just that: keeping track of remote names.\n> \n> I think there's room for this feature to live outside of remotenames. But currently I think it is the best place for it, since remotenames is the closest thing we have to... tracking remote names. We can always alias the old config option in the future if we move this functionality elsewhere.\n\nOne of the biggest regrets I have about the original remotenames, is the modifying of push (and some default) behavior. The `--to` is small enough (and I guess fine enough) for now but I absolutely and strongly believe that all the other behavior modifications should stay in an out-of-core repo for now. My goal is to split my remotenames repo to be based off of core's remotenames (basically only having the behavior changing patches there).","author":"smf","id":"52118","dateCreated":"1523482769","dateModified":"1523482769"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D2873#52025, @smf wrote:\n>>>! In D2873#52021, @indygreg wrote:\n>> Looks good!\n> \n> I'm very heavily against this direction. Changing the behavior of push (even in this extension) is something I've always considered outside the scope of remotenames. Having another extension that changes push behavior (e.g. bookmark-push) is where I think this should go so that remotenames is just that: keeping track of remote names.\n\nI think there's room for this feature to live outside of remotenames. But currently I think it is the best place for it, since remotenames is the closest thing we have to... tracking remote names. We can always alias the old config option in the future if we move this functionality elsewhere.","author":"indygreg","id":"52100","dateCreated":"1523480112","dateModified":"1523480112"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D2873#52021, @indygreg wrote:\n> Looks good!\n\nI'm very heavily against this direction. Changing the behavior of push (even in this extension) is something I've always considered outside the scope of remotenames. Having another extension that changes push behavior (e.g. bookmark-push) is where I think this should go so that remotenames is just that: keeping track of remote names.","author":"smf","id":"52026","dateCreated":"1523467971","dateModified":"1523467971"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Nit: \"exist\". This can be fixed in flight.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"113","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/remotenames.py","diffId":"7286","author":"indygreg","id":"52023","dateCreated":"1523467769","dateModified":"1523467769"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Looks good!","author":"indygreg","id":"52022","dateCreated":"1523467769","dateModified":"1523467769"},{"type":"accept","author":"indygreg","id":"52021","dateCreated":"1523467769","dateModified":"1523467769"},{"type":"comment","comment":"A gentle reminder for reviewing this series. If this config option gets in, we can use it in infinitepush extension too where for now we have overridden `-B` flag in a hacky way.","author":"pulkit","id":"48737","dateCreated":"1522601487","dateModified":"1522601487"},{"type":"update","diffId":"7286","author":"pulkit","id":"47560","dateCreated":"1522064849","dateModified":"1522064849"},{"type":"inline","comment":"What happens if we're pushing multiple heads? I suspect this will choose a head\/revision arbitrarily - maybe depending on the `-r` arguments to `hg push`.\n\nI think we need to validate that the outgoing revs are in a single DAG head and we should then pick the rev that is the DAG head.\n\nPlease add test coverage for multiple `-r` arguments and `-r` arguments that resolve to multiple heads.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"99","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/remotenames.py","diffId":"7249","author":"indygreg","id":"47382","dateCreated":"1521831360","dateModified":"1521831360"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Nit: what is `--create`?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"101","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/remotenames.py","diffId":"7249","author":"indygreg","id":"47381","dateCreated":"1521831360","dateModified":"1521831360"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Strictly speaking, we should probably wrap `exchange._pushdiscoverybookmarks` so other extensions can get involved. But I think this is fine.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"287","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/remotenames.py","diffId":"7249","author":"indygreg","id":"47380","dateCreated":"1521831360","dateModified":"1521831360"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I'm happy with this feature.\n\nBut the code needs work around multiple revisions\/heads before it can be queued.","author":"indygreg","id":"47379","dateCreated":"1521831360","dateModified":"1521831360"},{"type":"reject","author":"indygreg","id":"47378","dateCreated":"1521831360","dateModified":"1521831360"},{"type":"update","diffId":"7249","author":"pulkit","id":"47274","dateCreated":"1521704112","dateModified":"1521704112"},{"type":"update","diffId":"7103","author":"pulkit","id":"46423","dateCreated":"1521448561","dateModified":"1521448561"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I am not sure the functionality and config names should go to core or not, so I have introduced them in this extension. Also suggestions for better config names are welcome.","author":"pulkit","id":"46265","dateCreated":"1521212432","dateModified":"1521212432"},{"type":"update","diffId":"7061","author":"pulkit","id":"46148","dateCreated":"1521121763","dateModified":"1521121763"}],"dateCreated":"1521121763","dateModified":"1587571035","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"2875","callsign":"HG","title":"remotenames: introduce a config option to allow creation of remote bookmarks","author":"pulkit","summary":"This patch introduces another config option which if set to true, we can create\nnew bookmarks on the server using push command. An earlier patch added\ncapability to push to a certain bookmark on the server. If bookmark was not\nalready present on the server, we errored out. With\nremotenames.createremotebookmark config set, the push will create that bookmark\non the server.\n\nThis series serves as a great feature for people who use bookmarks as after this\nyou can push changesets to a bookmark which does not exists locally. In other\nwords, you can push your changesets to a bookmark without having it locally.\n\nThis series will help people in having a non-local bookmark workflow involving\nremotenames.\n\nThe functionality added in this patch is equivalent to --create flag to push\ncommand added by hgremotenames extension.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"166","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["indygreg","marmoute"],"ccs":["marmoute","mercurial-patches","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"Baymax does not catch stuff in `Accepted` state, but this diff is over 2 years old, so resubmit if still relevant.","author":"marmoute","id":"126421","dateCreated":"1587571026","dateModified":"1587571026"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"126420","dateCreated":"1587571026","dateModified":"1587571026"},{"type":"accept","author":"indygreg","id":"52032","dateCreated":"1523468132","dateModified":"1523468132"},{"type":"update","diffId":"7288","author":"pulkit","id":"47564","dateCreated":"1522064875","dateModified":"1522064875"},{"type":"update","diffId":"7251","author":"pulkit","id":"47276","dateCreated":"1521704137","dateModified":"1521704137"},{"type":"update","diffId":"7105","author":"pulkit","id":"46425","dateCreated":"1521448583","dateModified":"1521448583"},{"type":"update","diffId":"7063","author":"pulkit","id":"46164","dateCreated":"1521121786","dateModified":"1521121786"}],"dateCreated":"1521121786","dateModified":"1587571027","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"7577","callsign":"HG","title":"hg-core: implement Mercurial's config file discovery logic","author":"indygreg","summary":"The imported Facebook code for locating Mercurial config files\ndiffered from what Mercurial itself does. This commit modifies the\nlogic to match what Mercurial currently does.\n\nAs part of this, we added some crate dependencies. We could probably\navoid these dependencies if we want. But these crates are quite popular\nand useful and I imagine we'll end up using them eventually.\n\nWe should probably add some test coverage of this code...","testPlan":"","lineCount":"148","dependsOn":["7576"],"reviewers":["kevincox","Alphare","baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","durin42","kevincox","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"126413","dateCreated":"1587570782","dateModified":"1587570782"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"126412","dateCreated":"1587570782","dateModified":"1587570782"},{"type":"accept","author":"Alphare","id":"111521","dateCreated":"1575896924","dateModified":"1575896924"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I believe this can just be `.flatten()`.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"145","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hg-core\/src\/configparser\/config.rs","diffId":"18544","author":"kevincox","id":"111453","dateCreated":"1575894221","dateModified":"1575894221"},{"type":"accept","author":"kevincox","id":"111452","dateCreated":"1575894221","dateModified":"1575894221"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18544","author":"indygreg","id":"111399","dateCreated":"1575759436","dateModified":"1575759436"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18537","author":"indygreg","id":"111349","dateCreated":"1575749873","dateModified":"1575749873"}],"dateCreated":"1575749873","dateModified":"1587570782","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"7717","callsign":"HG","title":"rust-discovery: restoring add_missing cheap early return","author":"gracinet","summary":"In case the iterator of missing revisions argument turns out\nto be empty, we need to refrain from computing the undecided\nset. This way, we'll benefit from subsequent add_common_revisions\nuntil there is an actually meaningful add_missing_revisions.\n\nTo do this with the typestate pattern, that means the early\nreturn has to happen before potential transition into an\nWithUndecided","testPlan":"","lineCount":"23","dependsOn":["7716"],"reviewers":["Alphare","baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","durin42","kevincox","mjpieters","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"126409","dateCreated":"1587570781","dateModified":"1587570781"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"126408","dateCreated":"1587570781","dateModified":"1587570781"},{"type":"accept","author":"Alphare","id":"114421","dateCreated":"1578044801","dateModified":"1578044801"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18925","author":"gracinet","id":"113690","dateCreated":"1577195395","dateModified":"1577195395"}],"dateCreated":"1577195395","dateModified":"1587570781","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"7718","callsign":"HG","title":"rust-directory: simplify bidirectional sampling","author":"gracinet","summary":"Thanks to the typestate pattern, we don't have a\ncomplicated management of borrows to perform in\nthat method with the early return condition and\nthe comment was just obsolete.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"9","dependsOn":["7717"],"reviewers":["Alphare","baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","durin42","kevincox","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"126405","dateCreated":"1587570780","dateModified":"1587570780"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"126404","dateCreated":"1587570780","dateModified":"1587570780"},{"type":"accept","author":"Alphare","id":"114422","dateCreated":"1578044870","dateModified":"1578044870"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18926","author":"gracinet","id":"113698","dateCreated":"1577195401","dateModified":"1577195401"}],"dateCreated":"1577195401","dateModified":"1587570780","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"7719","callsign":"HG","title":"rust-discovery: children cache as typestate transition","author":"gracinet","summary":"As of 8c9a6adec67a, we were actually using\nthe children cache right away in `add_missing_revisions`,\nthe method that also triggers the undecided set computation\n(see that changeset description for the corresponding\nperformance discussion).\n\nThis means we don't need a third typestate for the children\ncache: `WithUndecided` can always have it.\n\nIt is clear that `compute_children_cache` does not have\nto be tied to the `WithUndecided` struct anymore. We may\nmove it to `hg::dagops` in a later move.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"63","dependsOn":["7718"],"reviewers":["Alphare","baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","durin42","kevincox","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"126401","dateCreated":"1587570779","dateModified":"1587570779"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"126400","dateCreated":"1587570779","dateModified":"1587570779"},{"type":"accept","author":"Alphare","id":"114423","dateCreated":"1578045124","dateModified":"1578045124"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18927","author":"gracinet","id":"113706","dateCreated":"1577195409","dateModified":"1577195409"}],"dateCreated":"1577195409","dateModified":"1587570779","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"7720","callsign":"HG","title":"rust-discovery: moved some methods to the wrapper enum","author":"gracinet","summary":"In the primary switch to the typestate pattern, these\nmethods have been kept on the `WithUndecided` struct, that\nhad most of the original methods of `PartialDiscovery`, so\nthat the change would be readable.\n\nBut we feel it makes more sense to have them on the wrapper\nenum.\n\n`common_heads` would also be a candidate for a last stage method,\nwe wouldn't need that lenghty warning docstring that it's not\nrelevant if `is-complete` is `true`","testPlan":"","lineCount":"44","dependsOn":["7719"],"reviewers":["Alphare","baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","durin42","kevincox","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"126397","dateCreated":"1587570778","dateModified":"1587570778"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"126396","dateCreated":"1587570778","dateModified":"1587570778"},{"type":"accept","author":"Alphare","id":"114424","dateCreated":"1578045272","dateModified":"1578045272"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18928","author":"gracinet","id":"113715","dateCreated":"1577195416","dateModified":"1577195416"}],"dateCreated":"1577195416","dateModified":"1587570778","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"7721","callsign":"HG","title":"rust-discovery: postponing random generator init","author":"gracinet","summary":"This is an example of the benefits we get with the\ntypestape pattern: we can cleanly postpone the\nseeding and initialisation of the random generator.\n\nThis makes the `default()` method a bit cheaper. Its point\nis that its output is a placeholder not meand to be really used,\nbut if that happened, it would now be with the knowledge that\nthe seed hasn't been initialized (and possible seeding after\nmorphing into a discovery with undecided set)","testPlan":"","lineCount":"41","dependsOn":["7720"],"reviewers":["Alphare","baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","durin42","kevincox","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"126393","dateCreated":"1587570777","dateModified":"1587570777"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"126392","dateCreated":"1587570777","dateModified":"1587570777"},{"type":"accept","author":"Alphare","id":"114425","dateCreated":"1578045385","dateModified":"1578045385"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18929","author":"gracinet","id":"113723","dateCreated":"1577195423","dateModified":"1577195423"}],"dateCreated":"1577195423","dateModified":"1587570777","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"7722","callsign":"HG","title":"rust-discovery: simplifying add_missing_revisions()","author":"gracinet","summary":"with the removal of the various ensure() it's become\nclear that this doesn't have error cases any more, and we didn't\nneed the full match at the end.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"21","dependsOn":["7721"],"reviewers":["Alphare","baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-patches","durin42","kevincox","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"126389","dateCreated":"1587570776","dateModified":"1587570776"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"126388","dateCreated":"1587570776","dateModified":"1587570776"},{"type":"accept","author":"Alphare","id":"114426","dateCreated":"1578045432","dateModified":"1578045432"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18930","author":"gracinet","id":"113731","dateCreated":"1577195430","dateModified":"1577195430"}],"dateCreated":"1577195430","dateModified":"1587570776","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"6846","callsign":"HG","title":"packaging: script the building of a MacOS installer using a custom python","author":"mharbison72","summary":"The intent here is to get away from relying on system python (which is going\naway in 10.16), so that an installer can easily be built to work on multiple\nversions of the OS.  10.9 was chosen as the minimum platform here because that's\nthe SDK needed to notarize, and also what the binary python installer targets.\nA lot of this was adapted from the script that builds the TortoiseHg DMG.\n\nThere's a useful thg customization (not duplicated here), which extends\n`sys.path` to include $HOME\/Library\/Python\/2.7\/lib\/python\/site-packages, because\nthere's no way to add to the bundled python after the app is signed.  As it\nstands now, this installation won't see that, but does see\n$HOME\/.local\/lib\/python2.7\/site-packages, and the bundled `pip` will install\nthere with `--user`.  It does seem like only seeing the second `--user` location\nwill get confusing, especially since the current behavior is that\n`pip install --user ...` just works for `pip` in PATH.\n\nThe prerequisite is to have python3 to run the script, and a working python2\nwith docutils installed to feed to the script.  (The latter is used to build and\ninstall the documentation for Mercurial without polluting the python distro to\nbe packaged, so maybe we can use python3 there.)\n\nThe general flow is to download, build and install OpenSSL off to the side, and\nthen use that to download, build and install Python to a separate staging area.\nThe certifi package is bundled for the root certificates.  I'm not an expert in\nwhat OpenSSL compilation options should be used, so if there's a way to tighten\nthings up, let me know.\n\nI don't like how the other packaging scripts assume an existing path on the\nsystem, so this uses the build directory to stage the Python and OpenSSL builds.\nThe existing system python installer stages in `build\/mercurial`, but this\nbuilds Mercurial into the staged python directory.  (That path includes version\ninfo, so it shouldn't be much to add python3 support and build both at the same\ntime.)  I also wasn't sure where to stash the downloads (they seem somewhat\nuseful to cache), so I stuffed them into the packages directory (which gets\nclobbered by `make clean`).\n\nTo distinguish from the system python installer (and with an eye towards\npython3), `-py2.7` is added after the Mercurial version to the file name.\nAltogether, this takes about 10 minutes to build on a 2018 Mac Mini.\n\nThere's additional followup work to do, in addition to the obvious py3 support-\nthe readme still mentions depending on system python, and this could probably be\ndriven by the makefile as a separate target.  It should be trivial to sign the\nbinaries and installer, and slightly less trivial to notarize the *.pkg, but\ndefinitely doable.  The files in the final *.pkg can be listed like so:\n\n    pkgutil --payload-files dist\/Mercurial-*.pkg\n\nLooking at that, there's probably a bunch of junk that can be removed:\n\n    - include\/\n    - distutils\/tests\/\n    - lib-tk\/test\/\n    - ctypes\/test\/,\n    - unittest\n    - test\n    - lib2to3\n    - idle\n    - pydoc\n\nI didn't see config options for that, and maybe it isn't worth it.  The\ninstaller ends up around 39MB.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"364","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":[],"ccs":["indygreg","marmoute","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6846#126171, @marmoute wrote:\n> So as I understand this is not ready to land and should be moved to change-requested (or change planned), right ?\n\nYeah, I'll move this out of the way, and can abandon it when PyOxidizer builds are in place.","author":"mharbison72","id":"126173","dateCreated":"1587149777","dateModified":"1587149777"},{"type":"plan-changes","author":"mharbison72","id":"126172","dateCreated":"1587149777","dateModified":"1587149777"},{"type":"comment","comment":"So as I understand this is not ready to land and should be moved to change-requested (or change planned), right ?","author":"marmoute","id":"126171","dateCreated":"1587148771","dateModified":"1587148771"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6846#124054, @marmoute wrote:\n> What's the status of this ? @mharbison72  id the linking problem got solved ?\n\nI've been too busy to get back to this, and probably won't for the short term, anyway.\n\nIt would probably also be a good to have a general idea when we drop py2 completely.  I'd be content leaving py2 around for awhile for various reasons, but I don't want to sink a bunch of time into something that lasts for one release.  (I think a PyOxidizer build would end up being a lot different looking than this.)","author":"mharbison72","id":"124250","dateCreated":"1584759006","dateModified":"1584759006"},{"type":"comment","comment":"What's the status of this ? @mharbison72  id the linking problem got solved ?","author":"marmoute","id":"124054","dateCreated":"1584659831","dateModified":"1584659831"},{"type":"inline","comment":"From the scripts used to build TortoiseHg on Mac, and the OpenSSL wiki:\n\nhttps:\/\/bitbucket.org\/Weeds2000\/tortoisehg-osx-build-scripts\/src\/e459bb439730d7e7e3a4b8c474f74aab164d6c9f\/toolchain\/receipts\/openssl.sh#lines-41\n\nhttps:\/\/wiki.openssl.org\/index.php\/Compilation_and_Installation#OS_X","replyTo":"120515","isNewFile":"1","line":"54","lineLength":"0","path":"contrib\/packaging\/hgpackaging\/python.py","diffId":"16526","author":"mharbison72","id":"120558","dateCreated":"1581526775","dateModified":"1581526775"},{"type":"inline","comment":"The original shebang line was much longer, so after writing it out with the shorter one, I think this was meant to trim the file. too the proper content.","replyTo":"120517","isNewFile":"1","line":"170","lineLength":"0","path":"contrib\/packaging\/macosx\/build.py","diffId":"16526","author":"mharbison72","id":"120557","dateCreated":"1581526775","dateModified":"1581526775"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6846#120513, @indygreg wrote:\n> macOS supports a `@loader_path` and related magic tokens in rpath to load libraries relative to the current binary. See e.g. https:\/\/blogs.oracle.com\/dipol\/dynamic-libraries,-rpath,-and-mac-os and https:\/\/medium.com\/@donblas\/fun-with-rpath-otool-and-install-name-tool-e3e41ae86172 for examples.\n\nI saw those, thanks.  I guess what's confusing is I don't see RPATH being configured when building OpenSSL for the TortoiseHg build, nor do I see it being overwritten when running py2app.  I also interpreted this to mean that is should be automatic on Mac, but I guess not:\n\nhttps:\/\/wiki.openssl.org\/index.php\/Compilation_and_Installation#Using_RPATHs","author":"mharbison72","id":"120556","dateCreated":"1581526775","dateModified":"1581526775"},{"type":"inline","comment":"`fp.truncate()`?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"170","lineLength":"0","path":"contrib\/packaging\/macosx\/build.py","diffId":"16526","author":"indygreg","id":"120517","dateCreated":"1581476182","dateModified":"1581476182"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I _think_ we also want `--enable-lto` for more speed wins.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"120","lineLength":"0","path":"contrib\/packaging\/hgpackaging\/python.py","diffId":"16526","author":"indygreg","id":"120516","dateCreated":"1581476182","dateModified":"1581476182"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Where did you get this line and `enable-cms` from?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"54","lineLength":"0","path":"contrib\/packaging\/hgpackaging\/python.py","diffId":"16526","author":"indygreg","id":"120515","dateCreated":"1581476182","dateModified":"1581476182"},{"type":"inline","comment":"1.0.2u is out and should be used.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"29","lineLength":"0","path":"contrib\/packaging\/hgpackaging\/downloads.py","diffId":"16526","author":"indygreg","id":"120514","dateCreated":"1581476182","dateModified":"1581476182"},{"type":"comment","comment":"macOS supports a `@loader_path` and related magic tokens in rpath to load libraries relative to the current binary. See e.g. https:\/\/blogs.oracle.com\/dipol\/dynamic-libraries,-rpath,-and-mac-os and https:\/\/medium.com\/@donblas\/fun-with-rpath-otool-and-install-name-tool-e3e41ae86172 for examples.","author":"indygreg","id":"120513","dateCreated":"1581475710","dateModified":"1581475710"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Ha, ok.","author":"marmoute","id":"119491","dateCreated":"1580979783","dateModified":"1580979783"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6846#119328, @marmoute wrote:\n> are we talking about python library or compiled library ? Go you have any \"empty\" item in the various PATH used for the build ?\n\nSee https:\/\/phab.mercurial-scm.org\/D6846#100512.\n\nI'm not sure what you mean about empty items.  The build directory is out of the way, not on PATH.  It's just that `_ssl.so` wants to load OpenSSL libraries from the path where they were built.  It actually works fine after installing- until you do a `make clean`, which is how I noticed the problem.","author":"mharbison72","id":"119482","dateCreated":"1580956098","dateModified":"1580956098"},{"type":"comment","comment":"are we talking about python library or compiled library ? Go you have any \"empty\" item in the various PATH used for the build ?","author":"marmoute","id":"119328","dateCreated":"1580918617","dateModified":"1580918617"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6846#118733, @marmoute wrote:\n> What's the latest with this diff ? It seems to still be a work in progress. Should it be in the \"need-review\" state?\n\nThe hangup here is that the installed code seems to want to look in the path where it was built to load libraries.  I have no idea why.  It would be good if somebody figured out why, because I have a similar problem with the thg build on Mac.  (But unlike here, that's not fatal because it falls back to a library inside the bundle.)\n\nMy thought with this was to be able to build an official py2 installer that worked on more than the very latest platform.  But I also thought that we would hang on to py2 for awhile.  If we're not, then this probably isn't worth pursuing, assuming PyOxidizer works out on OS X (so far, so good).  I'm not so excited about dropping py2 because of the amount of work still needed on hg on Windows, thg on Windows and Mac, and the packaging on both.  But 10.16 will remove all builtin python, so something will probably need to be done one way or the other by September or so.","author":"mharbison72","id":"118786","dateCreated":"1580448255","dateModified":"1580448255"},{"type":"comment","comment":"What's the latest with this diff ? It seems to still be a work in progress. Should it be in the \"need-review\" state?","author":"marmoute","id":"118733","dateCreated":"1580408474","dateModified":"1580408474"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6846#100478, @mharbison72 wrote:\n> This seems to work (though the shebang line hack is painful)- until the original python build directory is deleted.  Then a lot of things complain about unsupported hash type for md5 and sha{1,224,256,384,512}.  Other modules like `json` can be imported with the installed python executable.  I grepped around for the build directory, and it is in a bunch of *.so files (though this could be `__FILE__` for all I know).  Any ideas?\n\nSo, the problem here is that openssl libraries are being built and installed with the temporary install path, and the `_ssl.so` module is expecting to find them there.  I tried a custom Setup.local that statically links `_ssl.so` against openssl before configuring python, but the build summary said dependencies were missing to build `_ssl` (among other things).  For some reason, the resulting build still seemed to be able to talk to https servers.  `help(_ssl)` said it was builtin, whereas `help(_ssl)` on the original build mentioned openssl (IIRC).\n\nThe `_ssl.so` module in the thg app has `@executable_path` in the library name, so that's why that works.  I also tried messing with `@rpath`, but I can't get that working either.  I'm not sure what else to try.","author":"mharbison72","id":"100512","dateCreated":"1568414255","dateModified":"1568414255"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This seems to work (though the shebang line hack is painful)- until the original python build directory is deleted.  Then a lot of things complain about unsupported hash type for md5 and sha{1,224,256,384,512}.  Other modules like `json` can be imported with the installed python executable.  I grepped around for the build directory, and it is in a bunch of *.so files (though this could be `__FILE__` for all I know).  Any ideas?","author":"mharbison72","id":"100478","dateCreated":"1568327294","dateModified":"1568327294"},{"type":"update","diffId":"16526","author":"mharbison72","id":"100472","dateCreated":"1568326880","dateModified":"1568326880"}],"dateCreated":"1568326880","dateModified":"1587149777","status":"Changes Planned"},{"id":"7295","callsign":"HG","title":"pytype: add a (very slow) test that executes pytype","author":"durin42","summary":"This doesn't actually pass yet, but I wanted to share it early so\nothers can play with pytype.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"38","dependsOn":["7384"],"reviewers":["indygreg","marmoute"],"ccs":["quark","marmoute","mharbison72","dlax","indygreg","mjpieters","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"According to IRC discussion with Augie, this is not ready yet.","author":"marmoute","id":"126169","dateCreated":"1587148569","dateModified":"1587148569"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"126168","dateCreated":"1587148569","dateModified":"1587148569"},{"type":"comment","comment":"> No, initially because I'd never heard of it, but now because I don't want to deal with ocaml. :)\n\nThe `pip install` version ships with a pre-compiled binary so an ocaml compiler is not needed.\n\n>  I'm dubious that it's doing anywhere near the checking of pytype if it manages to run to completion without errors. What does the output look like?\n\nGood question. I wasn't aware about the differences. I read pytype's README and the examples apply to pyre too. Pytype does type inference while pyre only checks functions that already have type annotations.\n\n\nPyre does complete ([output](https:\/\/bpaste.net\/7JCQ)). I wasn't able to get pytype past 44\/251 ([output](https:\/\/bpaste.net\/CLEQ)). For files with type annotations like `mail.py`, it seems pyre output is useful:\n\n```\n# on commit d844202324924919bc517691052d39c520e077eb\nmercurial\/mail.py:57:4 Inconsistent override [15]: `mail.STARTTLS.starttls` overrides method defined in `smtplib.SMTP` inconsistently. The overriding method is not annotated but should return a subtype of `typing.Tuple[int, bytes]`.\nmercurial\/mail.py:387:22 Incompatible variable type [9]: charsets is declared to have type `List[str]` but is used as type `None`.\nmercurial\/mail.py:392:28 Incompatible parameter type [6]: Expected `bytes` for 2nd anonymous parameter to call `_encode` but got `Union[bytes, str]`.\nmercurial\/mail.py:394:33 Incompatible parameter type [6]: Expected `bytes` for 1st anonymous parameter to call `encoding.strfromlocal` but got `Union[bytes, str]`.\nmercurial\/mail.py:397:35 Incompatible variable type [9]: charsets is declared to have type `List[str]` but is used as type `None`.\nmercurial\/mail.py:399:4 Incompatible variable type [9]: addr is declared to have type `str` but is used as type `bytes`.\nmercurial\/mail.py:402:30 Incompatible parameter type [6]: Expected `typing.Optional[str]` for 1st anonymous parameter to call `str.split` but got `bytes`.\nmercurial\/mail.py:405:8 Incompatible variable type [9]: addr is declared to have type `str` but is used as type `bytes`.\nmercurial\/mail.py:414:63 Incompatible parameter type [6]: Expected `bytes` for 1st anonymous parameter to call `encoding.strfromlocal` but got `str`.\nmercurial\/mail.py:417:31 Incompatible variable type [9]: charsets is declared to have type `List[str]` but is used as type `None`.\nmercurial\/mail.py:426:30 Incompatible variable type [9]: charsets is declared to have type `List[str]` but is used as type `None`.\nmercurial\/mail.py:446:22 Incompatible variable type [9]: charsets is declared to have type `List[str]` but is used as type `None`.\nmercurial\/mail.py:499:52 Incompatible parameter type [6]: Expected `Union[email.header.Header, str]` for 1st anonymous parameter to call `email.header.decode_header` but got `Union[bytes, email.header.Header]`.\n```\n\nIt seems to me that a combined approach might be interesting - use pytype to generate `pyi` files and pyre for faster checking.","author":"quark","id":"118882","dateCreated":"1580500731","dateModified":"1580500803"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7295#118785, @quark wrote:\n> Have `pyre` been considered?\n\nNo, initially because I'd never heard of it, but now because I don't want to deal with ocaml. :)\n\n> It seems `pyre` only takes 10 seconds to check all the `.py` files.\n> \n> EDIT: 10s on a machine with many CPU cores. 1 minute on laptop.\n\nI'm dubious that it's doing anywhere near the checking of pytype if it manages to run to completion without errors. What does the output look like?","author":"durin42","id":"118820","dateCreated":"1580483967","dateModified":"1580483967"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Have `pyre` been considered? It seems `pyre` only takes 10 seconds to check all the `.py` files.\n\nEDIT: 10s on a machine with many CPU cores. 1 minute on laptop.","author":"quark","id":"118785","dateCreated":"1580447745","dateModified":"1580449193"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This seems useful, and the stabilisation seems to take a long while. Maybe we could take it in its current state (with \"expected\" broken output) and iterate from there. With the test in the repo.\n\nWhat do you all think ?","author":"marmoute","id":"118743","dateCreated":"1580409284","dateModified":"1580409284"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7295#110254, @mharbison72 wrote:\n>>>! In D7295#107482, @indygreg wrote:\n>> Since type checking is slow (but there are state files we can reuse to speed things up), we'll need to figure out how to make this work in CI. But I have no doubt we can figure something out. Out of curiosity, how long does pytype take to run in a clean source directory, without any state files?\n> \n> It takes 15-20 minutes on a 2018 Mac mini.  In addition to the disabled files here, I've disabled:\n> \n>     mercurial\/httppeer.py\n>     mercurial\/repoview.py\n>     mercurial\/localrepo.py\n>     mercurial\/revlog.py\n>     mercurial\/merge.py\n>     mercurial\/testing\/storage.py\n> \n> But I've also added back these, and sprinkled various disable comments around:\n> \n>     mercurial\/bundlerepo.py\n>     mercurial\/error.py\n>     mercurial\/exchange.py\n>     mercurial\/policy.py\n>     mercurial\/pycompat.py\n>     mercurial\/scmwindows.py\n>     mercurial\/windows.py\n>     mercurial\/wireprotoframing.py\n> \n> Even with the state files, it seems to take 10-15 minutes or so.\n\nOoh, can you send your extra suppressions? For the most part I've been tackling this as a side project when I'm waiting on compiles.\n\nAs to doing individual files: that's well and good, and might be a viable approach for mypy. That said, my sense has been that mypy is faster and significantly less useful, since we don't get cross-file analysis of what's going on. I _think_ pytype gets faster as we add more annotations, so my rough thought thus far as been to try and get some subset of the codebase clean, transitively, and then try to start stamping some types on important functions and interfaces to constrain things. Where I'd _really_ like to get is to be able to migrate the `@command` decorators and friends to use strings instead of bytes, and be able to recommend typechecking as a way for extension authors to clean things up, but that'll take a while.","author":"durin42","id":"110437","dateCreated":"1574531296","dateModified":"1574531296"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7295#107482, @indygreg wrote:\n> Since type checking is slow (but there are state files we can reuse to speed things up), we'll need to figure out how to make this work in CI. But I have no doubt we can figure something out. Out of curiosity, how long does pytype take to run in a clean source directory, without any state files?\n\nIt takes 15-20 minutes on a 2018 Mac mini.  In addition to the disabled files here, I've disabled:\n\n    mercurial\/httppeer.py\n    mercurial\/repoview.py\n    mercurial\/localrepo.py\n    mercurial\/revlog.py\n    mercurial\/merge.py\n    mercurial\/testing\/storage.py\n\nBut I've also added back these, and sprinkled various disable comments around:\n\n    mercurial\/bundlerepo.py\n    mercurial\/error.py\n    mercurial\/exchange.py\n    mercurial\/policy.py\n    mercurial\/pycompat.py\n    mercurial\/scmwindows.py\n    mercurial\/windows.py\n    mercurial\/wireprotoframing.py\n\nEven with the state files, it seems to take 10-15 minutes or so.","author":"mharbison72","id":"110254","dateCreated":"1574462605","dateModified":"1574462605"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18242","author":"durin42","id":"109676","dateCreated":"1574187225","dateModified":"1574187225"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Needs a trailing slash here.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"22","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-check-pytype.t","diffId":"18104","author":"mharbison72","id":"109670","dateCreated":"1574180889","dateModified":"1574180889"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18104","author":"durin42","id":"108811","dateCreated":"1573765830","dateModified":"1573765830"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18072","author":"durin42","id":"108536","dateCreated":"1573703500","dateModified":"1573703500"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This can't land per commit message, so setting status accordingly.\n\nI'm extremely supportive of adding type checking, whether it be pytype or mypy. I don't think it matters much. And TBH I wouldn't be surprised if we end up with both once we drop Python 2 support and start using inline annotations heavily!\n\nAs for how to start testing, I think we should do this like Python 3 and try to make individual files \"clean.\" Maintain a list of clean files and we ratchet from there.\n\nSince type checking is slow (but there are state files we can reuse to speed things up), we'll need to figure out how to make this work in CI. But I have no doubt we can figure something out. Out of curiosity, how long does pytype take to run in a clean source directory, without any state files?","author":"indygreg","id":"107482","dateCreated":"1573231954","dateModified":"1573231954"},{"type":"reject","author":"indygreg","id":"107481","dateCreated":"1573231954","dateModified":"1573231954"},{"type":"update","diffId":"17665","author":"durin42","id":"106664","dateCreated":"1573081192","dateModified":"1573081192"}],"dateCreated":"1573081192","dateModified":"1587148569","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8352","callsign":"HG","title":"extensions: don't crash if __file__ not defined","author":"indygreg","summary":"This attribute isn't present in PyOxidizer when loading modules\nfrom memory.\n\nBefore, this code was crashing under PyOxidizer. After, it simply\nyields unexpected results. This still isn't great (we need a better\nmechanism to discover extensions when modules aren't loaded from\nthe filesystem). But it is strictly better since we no longer\nget tracebacks.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"4","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["marmoute","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"inline","comment":"Maybe mention that the result if \"wrong\" here? If I understand you commit message fine, this change does not make this code work as expected. It only prevent a crash. If I got this right, it would be useful to mention it in the comment.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"709","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/extensions.py","diffId":"20927","author":"marmoute","id":"124721","dateCreated":"1585729041","dateModified":"1585729041"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"124720","dateCreated":"1585729041","dateModified":"1585729041"},{"type":"update","diffId":"20927","author":"indygreg","id":"124704","dateCreated":"1585711761","dateModified":"1585711761"}],"dateCreated":"1585711761","dateModified":"1585729041","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"7296","callsign":"HG","title":"pycompat: kludge around pytype being confused by __new__","author":"durin42","summary":"Credit to Yuya for the idea of annotating the class as though it was a\ncallable. I honestly didn't expect this to work, but it does!\n\nWe annotate this awkwardly on a name alias of the type because putting\nthe annotation directly on the `class ...:` line as a comment breaks\nblack and I don't want to go down that rabbit hole.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"17","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["indygreg","dlax"],"ccs":["marmoute","yuja","mjpieters","dlax","indygreg","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"I'd like to get back to pytyping all the things, but I can't justify spending more time on it. If someone else wants to push things forward I'll gladly provide some mentorship.","author":"durin42","id":"124131","dateCreated":"1584719973","dateModified":"1584719973"},{"type":"plan-changes","author":"durin42","id":"124130","dateCreated":"1584719973","dateModified":"1584719973"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This is the last series stuck at the bottom of yadda.\n\nIt feels like it is still a work in progress, @durin42 can you clarify the status of this and possibly move it out of need-review if it is still a work in progress ? ","author":"marmoute","id":"124053","dateCreated":"1584659695","dateModified":"1584659695"},{"type":"comment","comment":"The status of this is unclear ? Are we waiting on:\n\n1) a the right way to do it in our codebase?\n2) a fix in pytype?\n3) a fix in python?\n4) something else?","author":"marmoute","id":"118737","dateCreated":"1580409000","dateModified":"1580409000"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7296#109684, @dlax wrote:\n> Looking closer at the error above, it mentions `bytestr.__init__`, not `__new__` (and there is in fact no type annotation for `__new__` in [typeshed](https:\/\/github.com\/python\/typeshed\/blob\/34d68ab0a2117a08fa221d3a10884f35cacf2cdc\/stdlib\/2and3\/builtins.pyi#L559)). \n\nhttps:\/\/github.com\/python\/typeshed\/issues\/2630","author":"dlax","id":"109688","dateCreated":"1574194446","dateModified":"1574194446"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Now the `type: ` is missing, so the comment is ignored.\n\nAdding it, `pytype mercurial\/pycompat.py` gives:\n```\nmercurial\/pycompat.py\", line 305, in <module>: Invalid type comment: Callable[[Union[bytes, str]], bytestr] [invalid-type-comment]\n  Name 'bytestr' is not defined\n```\nhence the kind of trick I suggested in my first comment on this line.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"305","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/pycompat.py","diffId":"18243","author":"dlax","id":"109687","dateCreated":"1574194206","dateModified":"1574194206"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7296#109683, @durin42 wrote:\n>>>! In D7296#109672, @dlax wrote:\n>> Sorry, still not ok afaict :\/\n> \n> So, I tried fixing this and it actually made things worse? dagparser.py no longer typechecks if I correct the syntax? Try the pytype invocation from the test at the end of the series and you'll see what I mean.\n\nOk, trying `pytype mercurial\/dagparser.py` I get a couple of those errors:\n```\nFile \"...\/mercurial\/dagparser.py\", line 172, in parsedag: Function bytestr.__init__ was called with the wrong arguments [wrong-arg-types]\n  Expected: (self, ints: Iterable[int])\n  Actually passed: (self, ints: str)\n```\n\nMy point was that we need to keep \"mercurial\/pycompat.py\" passing pytype before considering modules it depends on. Once the missing `type: ` is added and bytestr <-> _bytestr trick applied, it's okay but the error in dagparser.py persists...\nLooking closer at the error above, it mentions `bytestr.__init__`, not `__new__` (and there is in fact no type annotation for `__new__` in [typeshed](https:\/\/github.com\/python\/typeshed\/blob\/34d68ab0a2117a08fa221d3a10884f35cacf2cdc\/stdlib\/2and3\/builtins.pyi#L559)). So I suspect the \"Callable\" trick is not enough and we'd need a workaround similar to da925257 by @yuja . ","author":"dlax","id":"109686","dateCreated":"1574194206","dateModified":"1574194206"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7296#109672, @dlax wrote:\n> Sorry, still not ok afaict :\/\n\nSo, I tried fixing this and it actually made things worse? dagparser.py no longer typechecks if I correct the syntax? Try the pytype invocation from the test at the end of the series and you'll see what I mean.","author":"durin42","id":"109683","dateCreated":"1574187658","dateModified":"1574187658"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18243","author":"durin42","id":"109678","dateCreated":"1574187647","dateModified":"1574187647"},{"type":"inline","comment":"same here about missing `]`.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"414","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/pycompat.py","diffId":"18240","author":"dlax","id":"109674","dateCreated":"1574181559","dateModified":"1574181559"},{"type":"inline","comment":"`]` is still at the wrong place, I think. Should be `Callable[[Union[bytes, str]], bytestr]`.\nThen I still get the \"Name 'bytestr' is not defined\" error mentioned above.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"305","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/pycompat.py","diffId":"18240","author":"dlax","id":"109673","dateCreated":"1574181559","dateModified":"1574181559"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Sorry, still not ok afaict :\/","author":"dlax","id":"109672","dateCreated":"1574181559","dateModified":"1574181559"},{"type":"reject","author":"dlax","id":"109671","dateCreated":"1574181559","dateModified":"1574181559"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18240","author":"durin42","id":"109659","dateCreated":"1574180082","dateModified":"1574180082"},{"type":"comment","comment":"@durin42 I just queued most of the remaining patches in this series. This one still needs your attention, it appears.","author":"indygreg","id":"109571","dateCreated":"1574135272","dateModified":"1574135272"},{"type":"inline","comment":"A `]` is missing before `, bytestr`. Then, it's also missing `typing` imports.\nBut, even with this, I get:\n\n```\nInvalid type comment: Callable[[Union[bytes, str]], bytestr] [invalid-type-comment]\n  Name 'bytestr' is not defined\n```\n\nI'm able to make this pass with:\n```\nbytestr = _bytestr\nbytestr = bytestr  # type: Callable[[Union[bytes, str]], bytestr]\n```\n\n","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"294","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/pycompat.py","diffId":"18170","author":"dlax","id":"109308","dateCreated":"1573896532","dateModified":"1573896532"},{"type":"reject","author":"dlax","id":"109307","dateCreated":"1573896532","dateModified":"1573896532"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18170","author":"durin42","id":"109260","dateCreated":"1573854911","dateModified":"1573854911"},{"type":"comment","comment":"black complains because inline comments have only one space before (esp. the first one produces a parse error).\nLGTM otherwise.","author":"dlax","id":"109206","dateCreated":"1573840061","dateModified":"1573840061"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18163","author":"durin42","id":"109203","dateCreated":"1573839171","dateModified":"1573839171"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18161","author":"durin42","id":"109198","dateCreated":"1573839068","dateModified":"1573839068"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Rather `class bytestr(bytes):  # type: Callable[[Union[bytes, str], bytestr]` as @yuya suggested in D7380.","author":"dlax","id":"109159","dateCreated":"1573815818","dateModified":"1573815818"},{"type":"reject","author":"dlax","id":"109157","dateCreated":"1573815818","dateModified":"1573815818"},{"type":"comment","comment":"```\nclass bytestr(bytes):  # type: (Union[bytes,str]) -> bytestr\n  [...]\n```\n\nDoes this work?","author":"dlax","id":"108595","dateCreated":"1573729523","dateModified":"1573729523"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18066","author":"durin42","id":"108497","dateCreated":"1573703466","dateModified":"1573703466"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I'm going to mark for revisions until we know more so this doesn't show up in the reviewable list.","author":"indygreg","id":"107463","dateCreated":"1573231683","dateModified":"1573231683"},{"type":"reject","author":"indygreg","id":"107462","dateCreated":"1573231683","dateModified":"1573231683"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I've filed a bug with the pytype team, I'll report back.","author":"durin42","id":"106946","dateCreated":"1573142864","dateModified":"1573142864"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This one makes me sad because of potential performance regressions due to call overhead. I'd almost rather rip out Python 2 support rather than land this. But I could be convinced if pytypes is as cool as you say...\n\nIs there no way to annotate the types here without the call overhead? Could we do something like an `if False` trick to define a `def bytestr()` with the proper annotations? Surely there's got to be a way...","author":"indygreg","id":"106892","dateCreated":"1573115914","dateModified":"1573115914"},{"type":"update","diffId":"17672","author":"durin42","id":"106678","dateCreated":"1573082663","dateModified":"1573082663"}],"dateCreated":"1573082663","dateModified":"1584719973","status":"Changes Planned"},{"id":"7967","callsign":"HG","title":"exchange: recognize changegroup3 bundles in `getbundlespec()`","author":"mharbison72","summary":"Previously, `hg bundle --spec $bundle` complained that changegroup3 didn't have\na known bundlespec and suggested upgrading the client, even if the same binary\ngenerated the bundle.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"28","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["indygreg","marmoute","pulkit","joerg.sonnenberger","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"It looks like futher change will be necessary on this patch, moving it out of yadaa","author":"marmoute","id":"124082","dateCreated":"1584668017","dateModified":"1584668017"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"124081","dateCreated":"1584668017","dateModified":"1584668017"},{"type":"inline","comment":"> That being said, for purposes of parsing a bundle, it _might_ be acceptable to allow experimental\n> features through. We absolutely cannot do that on the write side, however, as it completely breaks\n> the bundle spec contract that content is well-defined.\n\nThat's concerning (I think).\n\nI got onto this path trying to generate clonebundles for a repo that uses LFS.  LFS forces the experimental changegroup3 (and removes the others as options).  I was able to generate the bundle, and was using this to try to figure out what the magic string was for filling out the manifest.  So there are bundles of a not-reported spec in the wild (I assume this is what you meant by the write side).  And if we were to BC changegroup3 for example, IDK how we tell that these older bundles are *not* whatever the new bundlespec becomes, since it seems that the only additional needed logic is to look for changegroup3.\n","replyTo":"121577","isNewFile":"1","line":"321","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/exchange.py","diffId":"19502","author":"mharbison72","id":"121579","dateCreated":"1582777785","dateModified":"1582777785"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Since changegroup `v3` is not advertised in an existing bundle spec definition at the top of this file, the proper thing to do here is create a new `v3` bundle specification that uses changegroup v3 by default. Then all bundle spec `v3` will be compatible with changegroup `v3`.\n\nBut before we create a new bundle spec, all features within it need to be non-experimental. The whole point of bundle specs is that if 2 clients of different versions claim they support a bundle spec, they actually do. If the content of a bundle change within a bundle spec, that's a BC.\n\nIf changegroup `v3` isn't stable yet, we should not be associating it with a bundle spec because a claimed `v2` bundle spec may not be readable by an old version or a client without the experimental feature enabled. That breaks the contract of bundle specifications.\n\nThat being said, for purposes of parsing a bundle, it _might_ be acceptable to allow experimental features through. We absolutely cannot do that on the write side, however, as it completely breaks the bundle spec contract that content is well-defined.","replyTo":"117057","isNewFile":"1","line":"321","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/exchange.py","diffId":"19502","author":"indygreg","id":"121577","dateCreated":"1582760232","dateModified":"1582760232"},{"type":"comment","comment":"To clarify, bundle specifications are user-facing whereas changegroup versions are an internal implementation detail. Their version numbers are thus on different timelines and aren't strictly related.\n\nA bundle specification version is essentially a collection of related bundle features at a given point in time. One of those bundle features would be the changegroup version. The idea is that every time we add a significant feature to bundles and want to expose that feature to users, we would bake a new bundle specification version that encapsulates that change. Over time, I would expect the total number of bundle specification versions to outnumber the changegroup versions, as any BC change to a bundle would incur a new bundle specification and there are more changes to bundles than just the changegroup format.\n\nWhile I'm here, in the context of bundle2, a monolithic changegroup bundle part doesn't make as much sense any more. We should arguably do away with the monolithic changegroup bundle2 part and instead send a series of deltas to named paths. But that's way beyond the scope of this review :)","author":"indygreg","id":"121576","dateCreated":"1582759818","dateModified":"1582759818"},{"type":"comment","comment":"It seems like I faild to have a look soon\u2122","author":"marmoute","id":"121561","dateCreated":"1582746860","dateModified":"1582746860"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7967#118158, @marmoute wrote:\n> I can confirm the spec version number are different to the changegroup version number. For the rest. I'll try to have a look soon.\n\nGentle ping on this","author":"mharbison72","id":"121559","dateCreated":"1582746790","dateModified":"1582746790"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I can confirm the spec version number are different to the changegroup version number. For the rest. I'll try to have a look soon.","author":"marmoute","id":"118158","dateCreated":"1580119112","dateModified":"1580119112"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I\u2019m not sure now. I think I went this way because I\u2019m pretty sure it complained when I tried to generate a bzip2-v3 bundle.  And since 01 is mapped to v2 and the error message is talking about finding a bundlespec, it seemed like v2 was the only option.  But maybe something is missing elsewhere too.  @marmoute?","replyTo":"117054","isNewFile":"1","line":"321","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/exchange.py","diffId":"19502","author":"mharbison72","id":"117057","dateCreated":"1579698258","dateModified":"1579698258"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Should not this be `v3`? I believe this is what @joerg.sonnenberger is also trying to point out on IRC.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"321","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/exchange.py","diffId":"19502","author":"pulkit","id":"117054","dateCreated":"1579697239","dateModified":"1579697239"},{"type":"update","diffId":"19502","author":"mharbison72","id":"117047","dateCreated":"1579649502","dateModified":"1579649502"}],"dateCreated":"1579649502","dateModified":"1584668017","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8290","callsign":"HG","title":"morestatus: recommend `hg resolve --clear` when appropriate","author":"martinvonz","summary":"","testPlan":"","lineCount":"5","dependsOn":["8289"],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["marmoute","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"This on seems need to be updated with `hg update --continue\/hg continue`","author":"marmoute","id":"124073","dateCreated":"1584662533","dateModified":"1584662533"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"124072","dateCreated":"1584662533","dateModified":"1584662533"},{"type":"update","diffId":"20779","author":"martinvonz","id":"123736","dateCreated":"1584134456","dateModified":"1584134456"}],"dateCreated":"1584134456","dateModified":"1584662533","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8289","callsign":"HG","title":"resolve: add a --clear option for clearing the merge state","author":"martinvonz","summary":"E.g. after running `hg co -m` and resolving merge conflicts, the merge\nstate will still exist. That can be seen when running `hg resolve -l`\nor `hg status -v` (a.k.a.  morestatus). There's currently no good way\nof clearing it (`hg co -C .` works, but is not an option if you have a\ndirty working copy). This patch adds `hg resolve --clear` specifically\nfor clearing the merge state.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"57","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":[],"ccs":["marmoute","pulkit","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8289#124060, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>! In D8289#124009, @pulkit wrote:\n>> I like the idea. IIRC, Ryan from FB hit similar issues in a sprint some years ago and came up with `hg up --finish` or something like that.\n>> \n>> Maybe we should not let user clear the mergestate and suggest `continue\/<cmd-name> --continue` if it's not result of update command. Thoughts?\n> \n> Ho, that's a good idea. It looks like `hg update --merge` is the only command that do not have `--continue` support. So instead of adding a whole new flag and action to this exception, removing the exception seems like a better move. What do you think @martinvonz ?\n\nYeah, I agree (sorry, was busy with other stuff today). It should be easy to change this patch from `hg resolve --clear` to `hg update --continue`. I might add the `hg continue` support as separate patch on top.","author":"martinvonz","id":"124062","dateCreated":"1584662143","dateModified":"1584662143"},{"type":"plan-changes","author":"martinvonz","id":"124061","dateCreated":"1584662143","dateModified":"1584662143"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D8289#124009, @pulkit wrote:\n> I like the idea. IIRC, Ryan from FB hit similar issues in a sprint some years ago and came up with `hg up --finish` or something like that.\n> \n> Maybe we should not let user clear the mergestate and suggest `continue\/<cmd-name> --continue` if it's not result of update command. Thoughts?\n\nHo, that's a good idea. It looks like `hg update --merge` is the only command that do not have `--continue` support. So instead of adding a whole new flag and action to this exception, removing the exception seems like a better move. What do you think @martinvonz ?","author":"marmoute","id":"124060","dateCreated":"1584661388","dateModified":"1584661388"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I like the idea. IIRC, Ryan from FB hit similar issues in a sprint some years ago and came up with `hg up --finish` or something like that.\n\nMaybe we should not let user clear the mergestate and suggest `continue\/<cmd-name> --continue` if it's not result of update command. Thoughts?","author":"pulkit","id":"124009","dateCreated":"1584606645","dateModified":"1584606645"},{"type":"update","diffId":"20820","author":"martinvonz","id":"123959","dateCreated":"1584482717","dateModified":"1584482717"},{"type":"update","diffId":"20778","author":"martinvonz","id":"123731","dateCreated":"1584134455","dateModified":"1584134455"}],"dateCreated":"1584134455","dateModified":"1584662143","status":"Changes Planned"},{"id":"7574","callsign":"HG","title":"hg-core: add utils::path to project","author":"indygreg","summary":"This module was vendored in the previous commit but was not integrated into\nthe project. This commit performs that integration.\n\nAs part of this, we have to add a handful of new dependencies. The new\ndependencies all seem quite reasonable. The versions taken were the exact\nones used by the upstream project.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"309","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["pulkit","marmoute"],"ccs":["marmoute","Alphare","durin42","kevincox","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"Looks like there are unresolved discussion about error handling here.","author":"marmoute","id":"124048","dateCreated":"1584659079","dateModified":"1584659079"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"124047","dateCreated":"1584659079","dateModified":"1584659079"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This one fails to apply with conflicts in `Cargo.lock`.","author":"pulkit","id":"115314","dateCreated":"1578933699","dateModified":"1578933699"},{"type":"reject","author":"pulkit","id":"115313","dateCreated":"1578933699","dateModified":"1578933699"},{"type":"accept","author":"pulkit","id":"115309","dateCreated":"1578933323","dateModified":"1578933323"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I actually wasn't aware of `anyhow` before writing this patch. And I have to say that I really like `anyhow` because it is simpler than other crates in this space while offering much of the same functionality.\n\nI think it is inevitable that we'll want to use a crate like `anyhow` for more advanced error handling. If nothing else, it can help cut down on boilerplate code around error handling.","replyTo":"111442","isNewFile":"1","line":"12","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hg-core\/Cargo.toml","diffId":"18534","author":"indygreg","id":"113657","dateCreated":"1577124884","dateModified":"1577124884"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Should we adopt this crate for error handling?\n\nI feel like our current solution - although it might need a refactor - is good at forcing the programmer to provide context with finer-grained errors that what you are required to do with `anyhow`.  I actually like `anyhow` better than more involved crates, but we will need to have a good \"error hygiene\" if you will.\n\nThis seems like a better place to discuss this than the previous patch.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"12","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hg-core\/Cargo.toml","diffId":"18534","author":"Alphare","id":"111442","dateCreated":"1575888850","dateModified":"1575888850"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18534","author":"indygreg","id":"111325","dateCreated":"1575749869","dateModified":"1575749869"}],"dateCreated":"1575749869","dateModified":"1584659079","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"7631","callsign":"HG","title":"absorb: allowing committed changes to be absorbed into their ancestors","author":"rdamazio","summary":"Like before, absorb continues to not touch the working directory, so any\nworking directory changes are preserved, even if the working directory parent\nchanges underneath (for instance, because the current revision was replaced\nwhen changes were absorbed into it).\n\nThis can also be combined with --interactive to absorb just part of a\ncommit into its parents.\n\nThis initial implementation has the shortcoming that it does not do anything\nwith the absorbed commit:\n- With obsmarkers, this means the user still needs to evolve, rebase or prune\n  manually\n- Without obsmarkers, the old commits would not be stripped at all because\n  their child was not replaced","testPlan":"","lineCount":"684","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["martinvonz","marmoute"],"ccs":["mjacob","marmoute","mharbison72","martinvonz","pulkit","quark","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7631#123321, @mharbison72 wrote:\n>>>! In D7631#123318, @mjacob wrote:\n>> I like the name `--from` for the option. It would also make sense in combination with a possible future `--into` option.\n> \n> The unfortunate thing about `--from` is that it implies a range in `hg fold`, whereas here it seems to be a single(?) commit.  It does make a lot of sense within the context of this command though (i.e. taking stuff \/\/from\/\/ this commit).  And it took me awhile to get comfortable with the meaning in `hg fold`, so maybe it can be changed to something else there?  In any event, I don't want to hold this up over an experimental name, just thinking out loud.\n\nThe `--from` in `hg fold` does not only have a different meaning, it\u2019s also a flag that does not take an argument. The `hg fold` command itself takes revisions as arguments, so people might think they pass a revision to `--from` while they actually pass a revision to `hg fold` (having the same meaning as if it is passed to `-r`). Coincidentally, I was asked for help today from someone misusing the command that way. The `hg rewind` command also takes a `--from` option, this time with an argument. I expect that at least one of it might get changed eventually and I think we should not block this patch on that discussion.\n\nOf course, if someone comes up with a name that doesn\u2019t have these problems and is intuitive, we should use that name.\n\n> I tend to agree with @martinvonz that setting the successor back to the commit it was absorbed into would be confusing, and seems like a way to split the stack into two stacks on that destination, with the corresponding merge conflicts.  (Would the new \"`hg evolve` => stabilize all descendants functionality\" even stop at the break?  I don't think it would.)  I get what you're going for though if you want to track content.  But it seems like it would cause non power users a lot of confusion.\n\nI prepared a patch that helps to prevent that the stack gets split: https:\/\/foss.heptapod.net\/mercurial\/evolve\/merge_requests\/126\n\nAs an example:\n\n```\necho a > a; hg add a; hg ci -m a\necho b > b; hg add b; hg ci -m b\necho c > c; hg add c; hg ci -m c\necho a1 > a; echo b1 > b; hg ci -m 'change a and b'\necho d > d; hg add d; hg ci -m d\n```\n\nGraph:\n```\n@  (4) d\n|\no  (3) change a and b\n|\no  (2) c\n|\no  (1) b\n|\no  (0) a\n```\n\nFirst, let\u2019s emulate a run of `hg absorb --from 3` that adds markers.\n```\nhg up 3\nhg uncommit --all\nhg up 2 --merge\nhg absorb --apply-changes\nhg prune -r 5 -s '6 + 7' --split\n```\n\nGraph:\n```\n@  (8) c\n|\no  (7) b\n|\no  (6) a\n\n*  (4) d\n|\nx  (3) change a and b \u2014 split using prune, uncommit as 6, 7\n|\nx  (2) c \u2014 rebased using absorb as 8\n|\nx  (1) b \u2014 rewritten using absorb as 7\n|\nx  (0) a \u2014 amended using absorb as 6\n```\n\nNow, `hg evolve -r 4` would have the following result without the above patch:\n```\no  (9) d\n|\n| @  (8) c\n|\/\no  (7) b\n|\no  (6) a\n\n```\n\nand with the above patch:\n```\no  (9) d\n|\n@  (8) c\n|\no  (7) b\n|\no  (6) a\n```","author":"mjacob","id":"123546","dateCreated":"1583965232","dateModified":"1583965232"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7631#123318, @mjacob wrote:\n> I like the name `--from` for the option. It would also make sense in combination with a possible future `--into` option.\n\nThe unfortunate thing about `--from` is that it implies a range in `hg fold`, whereas here it seems to be a single(?) commit.  It does make a lot of sense within the context of this command though (i.e. taking stuff \/\/from\/\/ this commit).  And it took me awhile to get comfortable with the meaning in `hg fold`, so maybe it can be changed to something else there?  In any event, I don't want to hold this up over an experimental name, just thinking out loud.\n\nI tend to agree with @martinvonz that setting the successor back to the commit it was absorbed into would be confusing, and seems like a way to split the stack into two stacks on that destination, with the corresponding merge conflicts.  (Would the new \"`hg evolve` => stabilize all descendants functionality\" even stop at the break?  I don't think it would.)  I get what you're going for though if you want to track content.  But it seems like it would cause non power users a lot of confusion.","author":"mharbison72","id":"123321","dateCreated":"1583899488","dateModified":"1583899488"},{"type":"inline","comment":"My preferred option would be to add obsmarkers from the absorbed changeset to the changed changesets. This is what I would usually do if I do a poor man\u2019s version of this functionality: I uncommit the \"source\" changeset, absorb, and prune the \"source\" changeset with the changed changesets as the successor.\n\nIt is true that `hg evolve` is likely to not behave in a useful manner in this case. But as someone who almost always specifies a successor when pruning, I already run into these problems regularly. Fixing that is probably out of scope for this discussion.\n\nI tend to say that adding obsmarkers should be part of this patch, but I\u2019m not very familiar with Mercurial\u2019s preferred workflow for things like this.","replyTo":"120507","isNewFile":"1","line":"993","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/absorb.py","diffId":"18728","author":"mjacob","id":"123320","dateCreated":"1583896507","dateModified":"1583896507"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I know that it was named like this before, but the name `targetctx` is quite confusing here, especially considering that the user-facing option will be something like `--from` or `--source`.\n\nCan it be changed, in a separate patch, after there is consensus about how the option should be called?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"983","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/absorb.py","diffId":"19981","author":"mjacob","id":"123319","dateCreated":"1583896507","dateModified":"1583896507"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I like the name `--from` for the option. It would also make sense in combination with a possible future `--into` option.","author":"mjacob","id":"123318","dateCreated":"1583896507","dateModified":"1583896507"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7631#120777, @marmoute wrote:\n> As explained in this comment https:\/\/phab.mercurial-scm.org\/D8030#120771 I find the idea of usign a changeset in place of the working copy interresting. However, this is a larger big UX change that seems to deserve a wider discussion with more of the community involved. In particular I am not convinced about the `--rev` flag usage.\n> \n> See the linked comment for more details.\n> \n> (Sorry for the delay this will involves, I wish the idea had explicitly surfaced earlier).\n\nThe sprint is not happening and I don't think we should wait for the next sprint (fall?) to move forward with this. Here's a Plan Page I wrote down in response to @marmoute's request D8030: on https:\/\/www.mercurial-scm.org\/wiki\/RevisionAsWDirPlan. The decision we reached was to use the name `--at-rev` on that patch. However, and if I understood correctly, the general sentiment was not that all similar arguments (like the on in this patch) should use that but rather that we should pick a name that sounded for each command. So in the case of this patch, I suppose `--from` is fine? We should mark it EXPERIMENTAL, though.\n","author":"martinvonz","id":"123178","dateCreated":"1583818890","dateModified":"1583818890"},{"type":"comment","comment":"As explained in this comment https:\/\/phab.mercurial-scm.org\/D8030#120771 I find the idea of usign a changeset in place of the working copy interresting. However, this is a larger big UX change that seems to deserve a wider discussion with more of the community involved. In particular I am not convinced about the `--rev` flag usage.\n\nSee the linked comment for more details.\n\n(Sorry for the delay this will involves, I wish the idea had explicitly surfaced earlier).","author":"marmoute","id":"120777","dateCreated":"1581636662","dateModified":"1581636662"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"120775","dateCreated":"1581636662","dateModified":"1581636662"},{"type":"inline","comment":"please revert (sorry about this annoying effect of copy detection)","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"4","lineLength":"3","path":"relnotes\/5.3","diffId":"19981","author":"martinvonz","id":"120508","dateCreated":"1581445540","dateModified":"1581445540"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I think we should at least have a TODO about adding them.\n\nBy the way, without the next patch's auto-evolve feature, I'm not sure we should add such markers. I think they would trick `hg evolve` into moving any descendant commits onto the topmost commit that was absorbed into, but that's probably not what the user wants (they probably want child commits to be moved onto the absorbed commit's parent).","replyTo":"118995","isNewFile":"1","line":"993","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/absorb.py","diffId":"18728","author":"martinvonz","id":"120507","dateCreated":"1581445540","dateModified":"1581445540"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Sorry about the delay in responding. Please remember to rebase the series to the latest @ on hg-committed (the release notes are otherwise likely to conflict).","author":"martinvonz","id":"120506","dateCreated":"1581445540","dateModified":"1581445540"},{"type":"reject","author":"martinvonz","id":"120505","dateCreated":"1581445540","dateModified":"1581445540"},{"type":"update","diffId":"19981","author":"rdamazio","id":"119744","dateCreated":"1581045061","dateModified":"1581045061"},{"type":"update","diffId":"19979","author":"rdamazio","id":"119740","dateCreated":"1581044150","dateModified":"1581044150"},{"type":"inline","comment":"See the child commit (D7630), which adds the \"evolve\" operation.\n\nBecause of the invariant about parent phases, checking that the revision being absorbed is not public also ensures that everything it's absorbing into is not public. Is that what you were looking for? If the commit A being absorbed is a draft and its parent is public, then absorb just won't find anywhere to absorb the lines and will leave everything in A.\n\nAbout setting obsmarkers from the absorbed commit into the targets, while that's technically correct, I suspect it'll become a hard-to-navigate mess which adds very little. Do you want me to add that?","replyTo":"115317","isNewFile":"1","line":"993","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/absorb.py","diffId":"18728","author":"rdamazio","id":"118995","dateCreated":"1580541031","dateModified":"1580541031"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Sorry for the delay in replying here.","author":"rdamazio","id":"118994","dateCreated":"1580541031","dateModified":"1580541031"},{"type":"update","diffId":"19811","author":"rdamazio","id":"118989","dateCreated":"1580541025","dateModified":"1580541025"},{"type":"inline","comment":"That's true in cmd.exe, but msys doesn't seem to care.  (That said, I thought check-code enforced quoting around `^`.)","replyTo":"115318","isNewFile":"1","line":"63","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-absorb-rev.t","diffId":"19048","author":"mharbison72","id":"116260","dateCreated":"1579193370","dateModified":"1579193370"},{"type":"inline","comment":"nit: I think I've heard that `^` needs to be quoted on Windows, so maybe `-s '.^+.'`","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"63","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-absorb-rev.t","diffId":"19048","author":"martinvonz","id":"115318","dateCreated":"1578936681","dateModified":"1578936681"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Maybe I'm also misunderstanding what this patch does in that case. `hg absorb -r A` will not obsolete A? I would think it definitely should do that. Perhaps the successors or the absorbed commit should be all the nodes absorbed into as well as any potential leftovers (which were not absorbed).","replyTo":"115301","isNewFile":"1","line":"993","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/absorb.py","diffId":"18728","author":"martinvonz","id":"115317","dateCreated":"1578936681","dateModified":"1578936681"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7631#112604, @rdamazio wrote:\n>>>! In D7631#112414, @quark wrote:\n>> `--rev` seems ambiguous since there might be different kinds of revisions to specify - target and revisions to edit. Maybe something like `--source`, `--from`, `--target`?\n> \n> Done. Used `--source` to match `rebase`.\n\nSorry I didn't notice until now, but `--source` makes me think it will behave like `hg rebase --source` and absorb from the given commit and all its descendants. I would have preferred `--from` (and maybe a `--into` for choosing which commits to absorb into in the future).","author":"martinvonz","id":"115316","dateCreated":"1578936681","dateModified":"1578936681"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I locally added some `hg log --graph` calls before and after absorb call to understand what happens. It will be nice to add them as it will make things easier for others to understand.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"72","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-absorb-rev.t","diffId":"19048","author":"pulkit","id":"115302","dateCreated":"1578931522","dateModified":"1578931522"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Sorry, I misunderstood the patch earlier. `rewriteutil.precheck` on target rev is not very helpful as we are not obsolete-ing that in this rev, but we are re-writing it's ancestors. So, if target-rev is a head, and `evolution.alloworphans=False` is set, it will still create orphans.\n\nNot sure what's the best way forward, maybe we should do `rewriteutil.precheck` for the parent instead until we start obsoleting this rev.","replyTo":"113171","isNewFile":"1","line":"993","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/absorb.py","diffId":"18728","author":"pulkit","id":"115301","dateCreated":"1578931522","dateModified":"1578931522"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I suspect other places may want something similar (e.g. it'd make sense in `rebase --dest`, so I changed revsingle to add the behavior.","replyTo":"114395","isNewFile":"1","line":"1141","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/absorb.py","diffId":"18873","author":"rdamazio","id":"114545","dateCreated":"1578358005","dateModified":"1578358005"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7631#114393, @mharbison72 wrote:\n>>>! In D7631#112604, @rdamazio wrote:\n>>>>! In D7631#112414, @quark wrote:\n>>> `--rev` seems ambiguous since there might be different kinds of revisions to specify - target and revisions to edit. Maybe something like `--source`, `--from`, `--target`?\n>> \n>> Done. Used `--source` to match `rebase`.\n> \n> Is `--exact` from `hg fold` a better model?  I don't feel strongly; I only mention it because `hg rebase -s` will take that revision and its descendants, so it's more like \"stack\" in my mind.  I'm not sure how many other commands have `-s` off the top of my head, but @martinvonz \n> mentioned adding that to `hg fix` (probably in IRC), and I think mentioned the word \"stack\" in that context.  So I might not be the only one to get slightly tripped up by that.\n\nIMHO no, needing `--exact` is actually confusing to almost every user we've talked to, and they'd instead expect that to be the default behavior, with \"fold up to this commit\" being the one that needs a specific flag.\n\n>> I'm assuming no fundamental objections then? Removing the \"RFC\" part so it gets a proper review then.\n> \n> I like it.\n\nThanks","author":"rdamazio","id":"114544","dateCreated":"1578358005","dateModified":"1578358005"},{"type":"update","diffId":"19048","author":"rdamazio","id":"114541","dateCreated":"1578357966","dateModified":"1578357966"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Should it abort if multiple revisions are given, instead of picking the latest?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"1141","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/absorb.py","diffId":"18873","author":"mharbison72","id":"114395","dateCreated":"1577996461","dateModified":"1577996461"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7631#112604, @rdamazio wrote:\n>>>! In D7631#112414, @quark wrote:\n>> `--rev` seems ambiguous since there might be different kinds of revisions to specify - target and revisions to edit. Maybe something like `--source`, `--from`, `--target`?\n> \n> Done. Used `--source` to match `rebase`.\n\nIs `--exact` from `hg fold` a better model?  I don't feel strongly; I only mention it because `hg rebase -s` will take that revision and its descendants, so it's more like \"stack\" in my mind.  I'm not sure how many other commands have `-s` off the top of my head, but @martinvonz \nmentioned adding that to `hg fix` (probably in IRC), and I think mentioned the word \"stack\" in that context.  So I might not be the only one to get slightly tripped up by that.\n\n> I'm assuming no fundamental objections then? Removing the \"RFC\" part so it gets a proper review then.\n\nI like it.\n","author":"mharbison72","id":"114394","dateCreated":"1577996461","dateModified":"1577996461"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18873","author":"rdamazio","id":"113351","dateCreated":"1576740998","dateModified":"1576740998"},{"type":"inline","comment":"s\/--rev\/--source","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"5","lineLength":"0","path":"relnotes\/next","diffId":"18843","author":"pulkit","id":"113262","dateCreated":"1576655750","dateModified":"1576655750"},{"type":"inline","comment":"s\/--rev\/--source","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"1113","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/absorb.py","diffId":"18843","author":"pulkit","id":"113261","dateCreated":"1576655750","dateModified":"1576655750"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18843","author":"rdamazio","id":"113172","dateCreated":"1576644411","dateModified":"1576644411"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Done. Notice that *technically* the user could do such an absorb while in the middle of a merge, but it sounds like a bad idea and inviting troubles, so I'm letting it also disallow that case. I'll be surprised if anyone even notices.","replyTo":"112977","isNewFile":"1","line":"993","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/absorb.py","diffId":"18728","author":"rdamazio","id":"113171","dateCreated":"1576644173","dateModified":"1576644173"},{"type":"comment","comment":"> Can you describe the feature a bit in the commit message. Specific things which I feel are missing:\n\nDone\n\n> Also, it will be nice if you add an entry in releasenotes.\n\nDone\n","author":"rdamazio","id":"113170","dateCreated":"1576644173","dateModified":"1576644173"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18841","author":"rdamazio","id":"113166","dateCreated":"1576644148","dateModified":"1576644148"},{"type":"inline","comment":"need to do more checks here about being public commit etc. `rewriteutil.precheck` should help.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"993","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/absorb.py","diffId":"18728","author":"pulkit","id":"112977","dateCreated":"1576585756","dateModified":"1576585756"},{"type":"inline","comment":"`hg status|diff` should be a better command here.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"73","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-absorb-rev.t","diffId":"18728","author":"pulkit","id":"112976","dateCreated":"1576585756","dateModified":"1576585756"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Can you describe the feature a bit in the commit message. Specific things which I feel are missing:\n\n* what happens to wdir changes\n* what happens if source is a commit is not a head\n\nI understand them but after reading the tests, so might be worth to add them to description.\n\nAlso, it will be nice if you add an entry in releasenotes.","author":"pulkit","id":"112975","dateCreated":"1576585756","dateModified":"1576585756"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18728","author":"rdamazio","id":"112605","dateCreated":"1576304726","dateModified":"1576304726"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7631#112414, @quark wrote:\n> `--rev` seems ambiguous since there might be different kinds of revisions to specify - target and revisions to edit. Maybe something like `--source`, `--from`, `--target`?\n\nDone. Used `--source` to match `rebase`.\n\nI'm assuming no fundamental objections then? Removing the \"RFC\" part so it gets a proper review then.\n\n","author":"rdamazio","id":"112604","dateCreated":"1576303338","dateModified":"1576303338"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18726","author":"rdamazio","id":"112598","dateCreated":"1576303328","dateModified":"1576303328"},{"type":"comment","comment":"`--rev` seems ambiguous since there might be different kinds of revisions to specify - target and revisions to edit. Maybe something like `--source`, `--from`, `--target`?","author":"quark","id":"112414","dateCreated":"1576261313","dateModified":"1576261313"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18666","author":"rdamazio","id":"112231","dateCreated":"1576216539","dateModified":"1576216539"}],"dateCreated":"1576216539","dateModified":"1583965232","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"8227","callsign":"HG","title":"hgit: use type_str instead of type for checking type of git objects","author":"pulkit","summary":"type returns a constant which were integers.\n\nhttps:\/\/www.pygit2.org\/objects.html#pygit2.Object.type","testPlan":"","lineCount":"2","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":[],"ccs":["mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"I should add some tests.","author":"pulkit","id":"122409","dateCreated":"1583420586","dateModified":"1583420586"},{"type":"plan-changes","author":"pulkit","id":"122408","dateCreated":"1583420586","dateModified":"1583420586"},{"type":"update","diffId":"20506","author":"pulkit","id":"122405","dateCreated":"1583419454","dateModified":"1583419454"},{"type":"update","diffId":"20505","author":"pulkit","id":"122400","dateCreated":"1583419181","dateModified":"1583419181"}],"dateCreated":"1583419181","dateModified":"1583420586","status":"Changes Planned"},{"id":"7257","callsign":"HG","title":"[RFC] repoview: add a \"filter\" that just disallows walking to heads","author":"martinvonz","summary":"This can let us find bugs where we think it shouldn't matter whether\nwe're using an unfiltered or filtered repo. We could then get a repo\nthat is using this new \"filter\" and if the code ends up trying to walk\nthe graph towards the changelog children, we would notice that.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"30","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["durin42","baymax"],"ccs":["durin42","marmoute","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"121134","dateCreated":"1582275051","dateModified":"1582275051"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"121133","dateCreated":"1582275051","dateModified":"1582275051"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I'm a big fan of this idea. I'd probably land it if there were some obvious usecases as child patches. :)","author":"durin42","id":"108443","dateCreated":"1573686616","dateModified":"1573686616"},{"type":"accept","author":"durin42","id":"108442","dateCreated":"1573686616","dateModified":"1573686616"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7257#108377, @marmoute wrote:\n> Can you elaborate on what this changeset is about ? the description is a bit\u2026 short;-)\n\nDone.","author":"martinvonz","id":"108379","dateCreated":"1573597314","dateModified":"1573597314"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Can you elaborate on what this changeset is about ? the description is a bit\u2026 short;-)","author":"marmoute","id":"108377","dateCreated":"1573596371","dateModified":"1573596371"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18048","author":"martinvonz","id":"108373","dateCreated":"1573594402","dateModified":"1573594402"},{"type":"update","diffId":"17625","author":"martinvonz","id":"106360","dateCreated":"1573059703","dateModified":"1573059703"}],"dateCreated":"1573059703","dateModified":"1582275051","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"7728","callsign":"HG","title":"rebase: add test to demonstrate issue6180","author":"khanchi97","summary":"It will be fixed in next patch.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"63","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["marmoute"],"ccs":["marmoute","pulkit","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"As per comment of Pulkit and I on D7730, please spin this test toward forbiding the prune while the rebase is in progress.","author":"marmoute","id":"120855","dateCreated":"1581669482","dateModified":"1581669482"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"120854","dateCreated":"1581669482","dateModified":"1581669482"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Cf my comment on D7730, I think the bug is more about letting others commands obsoleting things happens (eg, amend, pull, etc) than rebase being confused by the result.","author":"marmoute","id":"119015","dateCreated":"1580600761","dateModified":"1580600761"},{"type":"update","diffId":"19815","author":"khanchi97","id":"119011","dateCreated":"1580582406","dateModified":"1580582406"},{"type":"update","diffId":"19282","author":"khanchi97","id":"115765","dateCreated":"1579084940","dateModified":"1579084940"},{"type":"inline","comment":"You don't need to redefine it.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"438","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-rebase-conflicts.t","diffId":"18937","author":"pulkit","id":"114951","dateCreated":"1578579588","dateModified":"1578579588"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Ping.","author":"khanchi97","id":"114662","dateCreated":"1578483193","dateModified":"1578483193"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18937","author":"khanchi97","id":"113781","dateCreated":"1577465814","dateModified":"1577465814"}],"dateCreated":"1577465814","dateModified":"1581669482","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"7730","callsign":"HG","title":"rebase: make sure pruning does not confuse rebase (issue6180)","author":"khanchi97","summary":"Before this patch, if a user is rebasing a stack of commits and\nhit a conflict in between and decided to drop that commit (the commit\nwhich is being rebased but hit conflict) and pruned it, now what\n`hg rebase --continue` does is: skip that dropped commit and move\non to rebase the next commit and gets confused here because wdir\nhas two parents which is because while we skipped that dropped\ncommit wdir had two parents and we didn't update that to one parent.\n\nChanges in test file demonstrate the fixed behavior.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"11","dependsOn":["7728"],"reviewers":["martinvonz","marmoute"],"ccs":["marmoute","pulkit","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7730#119191, @pulkit wrote:\n>>>! In D7730#117268, @marmoute wrote:\n>> I think is would be simpler and sfare to prevent unrelated operation during rebase. If the user cannot prune here we won't have to deal with it. This woudl also apply to other operation that can alter the repository, like another rebase, amend or a pull. Starting using a unified and safe approach seems to provide more benefit with less chance of UI inconsistency.\n> \n> I agree. We should disallow prune if an unfinished operation exists.\n\nOkay, lets to in this direction then.","author":"marmoute","id":"120852","dateCreated":"1581668628","dateModified":"1581668628"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"120851","dateCreated":"1581668628","dateModified":"1581668628"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7730#117268, @marmoute wrote:\n> I think is would be simpler and sfare to prevent unrelated operation during rebase. If the user cannot prune here we won't have to deal with it. This woudl also apply to other operation that can alter the repository, like another rebase, amend or a pull. Starting using a unified and safe approach seems to provide more benefit with less chance of UI inconsistency.\n\nI agree. We should disallow prune if an unfinished operation exists.","author":"pulkit","id":"119191","dateCreated":"1580815575","dateModified":"1580815575"},{"type":"update","diffId":"19816","author":"khanchi97","id":"119012","dateCreated":"1580582417","dateModified":"1580582417"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I think is would be simpler and sfare to prevent unrelated operation during rebase. If the user cannot prune here we won't have to deal with it. This woudl also apply to other operation that can alter the repository, like another rebase, amend or a pull. Starting using a unified and safe approach seems to provide more benefit with less chance of UI inconsistency.","author":"marmoute","id":"117268","dateCreated":"1579797320","dateModified":"1579797320"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Actually, doesn't this need to be `wctx.setparents()` (which you can do now that D7822 has been queued) in order to work with in-memory rebase? Maybe time to add a test case with in-memory rebase?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"600","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/rebase.py","diffId":"19283","author":"martinvonz","id":"115947","dateCreated":"1579106322","dateModified":"1579106322"},{"type":"inline","comment":"No need, I've already sent D7827","replyTo":"115783","isNewFile":"1","line":"597","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/rebase.py","diffId":"18939","author":"martinvonz","id":"115944","dateCreated":"1579106125","dateModified":"1579106125"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I will look into it.","replyTo":"114713","isNewFile":"1","line":"597","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/rebase.py","diffId":"18939","author":"khanchi97","id":"115783","dateCreated":"1579093511","dateModified":"1579093511"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7730#114953, @pulkit wrote:\n> Unrelated to the fix, we need better way to skip commits during rebasing. Pruning manually is not a good option, IIRC git rebase have a `--skip` flag.\n\nYeah, that's a good idea. We should also have --skip flag to skip the commit on which rebase got interrupted.","author":"khanchi97","id":"115781","dateCreated":"1579093387","dateModified":"1579093387"},{"type":"update","diffId":"19283","author":"khanchi97","id":"115766","dateCreated":"1579084952","dateModified":"1579084952"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Unrelated to the fix, we need better way to skip commits during rebasing. Pruning manually is not a good option, IIRC git rebase have a `--skip` flag.","author":"pulkit","id":"114953","dateCreated":"1578579692","dateModified":"1578579692"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I think it's incorrect that rebase sets two parents while the merge is being resolved, but that's out of scope for this patch.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"597","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/rebase.py","diffId":"18939","author":"martinvonz","id":"114713","dateCreated":"1578505063","dateModified":"1578505063"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Should this be `self.wctx.parents()` to work with in-memory rebase?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"598","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/rebase.py","diffId":"18939","author":"martinvonz","id":"114712","dateCreated":"1578505063","dateModified":"1578505063"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Ping.","author":"khanchi97","id":"114663","dateCreated":"1578483218","dateModified":"1578483218"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18939","author":"khanchi97","id":"113800","dateCreated":"1577466343","dateModified":"1577466343"}],"dateCreated":"1577466343","dateModified":"1581668628","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"7258","callsign":"HG","title":"makefile: use Python 3 by default outside of Windows (BC)","author":"indygreg","summary":"I think the time has come. My main reason for wanting to do this is\nto force Mercurial developers to use Python 3 in their day-to-day work.\nThis should help flush out any remaining Python 3 bugs.\n\nIf this change is too controversial, we can revert it before the next\nrelease.\n\n.. bc::\n\n   Makefile now uses `python3` instead of `python` by default on\n   non-Windows platforms. This means Mercurial will be built and\n   run with Python 3 instead of Python 2.7 by default.\n\n   To continue using Python 2, set the PYTHON variable. e.g.\n   `make install PYTHON=python2.7`.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"11","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["martinvonz","mharbison72","durin42"],"ccs":["yuja","mharbison72","durin42","dlax","martinvonz","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"I like this, but I'm too chicken to queue it.","author":"durin42","id":"120567","dateCreated":"1581535650","dateModified":"1581535650"},{"type":"accept","author":"durin42","id":"120566","dateCreated":"1581535650","dateModified":"1581535650"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7258#109923, @indygreg wrote:\n> I seriously question whether we need a `Makefile` at all [on Windows]: our `Makefile` is just a glorified shell script and isn't doing much in terms of dependency management. I'm tempted to move the packaging targets to `contrib\/packaging` and replace the remaining build targets with a `build.py` script.\n\nThat seems OK to me.  I like being able to mindlessly run the same commands on any platform.  But in practice I only ever run `make clean` and `make local` everywhere, and `make install-bin` on unix systems.  Maybe a python script could handle that everywhere.  And I'd be fine with the packaging targets elsewhere in any case.\n\n>>! In D7258#109927, @indygreg wrote:\n> I just uploaded a compromise patch that ignores Windows for now.\n\nThanks!","author":"mharbison72","id":"109928","dateCreated":"1574396524","dateModified":"1574396524"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I just uploaded a compromise patch that ignores Windows for now.","author":"indygreg","id":"109927","dateCreated":"1574395820","dateModified":"1574395820"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18278","author":"indygreg","id":"109924","dateCreated":"1574395772","dateModified":"1574395772"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I seriously question whether we need a `Makefile` at all [on Windows]: our `Makefile` is just a glorified shell script and isn't doing much in terms of dependency management. I'm tempted to move the packaging targets to `contrib\/packaging` and replace the remaining build targets with a `build.py` script.","author":"indygreg","id":"109923","dateCreated":"1574395609","dateModified":"1574395609"},{"type":"comment","comment":"> To continue using Python 2, set the PYTHON variable. e.g.\n> `make install PYTHON=python2.7` or\n> `make install PYTHON=py.exe -2`.\n\nThe \"py -2\" part needs to be quoted.\n\nI'm not super excited to deal with this on Windows just yet, but I can't dispute the rationale.  There are two traps for anybody dealing with this on Windows to be aware of:\n\n1. Running `.\/hg debuginstall` will still run py2, even if it was built with py3.  I assume this is the shebang line, and also an issue on other platforms.\n2. Running `.\/hg.exe debuginstall` will run py3, but since that python isn't in $PATH, it complains that it can't find python37.dll and exits.\n\nI know @durin42 took a whack at #1; I'm not sure if there's something we can do about #2.  (I realize I could just edit $PATH, but it seems that the point of py.exe is to keep python.exe off of $PATH so that multiple installs can be managed.  IIRC, it's not added to $PATH by default on installation.)  Maybe we can just copy the dll to the local directory as part of setup.py?","author":"mharbison72","id":"109922","dateCreated":"1574394544","dateModified":"1574394544"},{"type":"accept","author":"mharbison72","id":"109921","dateCreated":"1574394544","dateModified":"1574394544"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This is ready for re-review. Please take a look @durin42.","author":"indygreg","id":"109920","dateCreated":"1574391834","dateModified":"1574391834"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18277","author":"indygreg","id":"109919","dateCreated":"1574391762","dateModified":"1574391762"},{"type":"update","diffId":"18276","author":"indygreg","id":"109915","dateCreated":"1574391718","dateModified":"1574391718"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7258#107444, @indygreg wrote:\n> I've seen `ifeq($(OS),Windows_NT)` used a lot. Although `OS` may be something else under msys. I'm away from my Windows machine until Sunday. I'll send a revision once I've had time to test on Windows.\n\nI can confirm that this is the correct environment variable under msys on Windows 7 and 10, and it works in the makefile as suggested.","author":"mharbison72","id":"107494","dateCreated":"1573232388","dateModified":"1573232388"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I've seen `ifeq($(OS),Windows_NT)` used a lot. Although `OS` may be something else under msys. I'm away from my Windows machine until Sunday. I'll send a revision once I've had time to test on Windows.","author":"indygreg","id":"107444","dateCreated":"1573230899","dateModified":"1573230899"},{"type":"plan-changes","author":"indygreg","id":"107443","dateCreated":"1573230899","dateModified":"1573230899"},{"type":"comment","comment":">     ifeq ($(shell uname -o), Msys)\n>     PYTHON?=py -2\n>     else\n>     PYTHON?=python3\n>     endif\n\nPerhaps, `ifeq($(OS),Windows_NT)` would work. My .profile had one.","author":"yuja","id":"107174","dateCreated":"1573224885","dateModified":"1573224885"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7258#106995, @durin42 wrote:\n>>>! In D7258#106949, @mharbison72 wrote:\n>> This will break Windows by default, because py3 is still named `python.exe`.  Alternately, I've been using using `PYTHON=\"py -3\"` to invoke `make`.\n> \n> I'm not sure what we should do here. We probably can't change the default only for Windows somehow? (My make-fu is not awesome)\n\n    ifeq ($(shell uname -o), Msys)\n    PYTHON?=py -2\n    else\n    PYTHON?=python3\n    endif\n\nGenerally I just test `uname`, but that prints \"MINGW32_NT-6.2\" on Windows 10 and \"MINGW32_NT-6.1\" on Win7.\n\n>> \n>> The command issued to the buildbot will need to explicitly use `PYTHON=\"py -2\"` to keep that happy.  Probably also need to invoke `run-tests.py` with the right python too, so that `$PYTHON` is correct.  It looks like the shebang lines are already `$PYTHON`, through some aren't quoted.\n> \n> Okay, I'll see about wiring that up tonight or tomorrow then. I believe that's the only (other) thing blocking this?\n\nI think that's correct.  I vaguely recall that some test helpers were run like `.\/foo.py` at one point, which works on Windows because the registered file handler for *.py is python2.  But that's more of an issue with py3 porting, and shouldn't block this.  And maybe it was fixed with all of the $PYTHON work you did.\n\n","author":"mharbison72","id":"106996","dateCreated":"1573176080","dateModified":"1573176080"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7258#106949, @mharbison72 wrote:\n> This will break Windows by default, because py3 is still named `python.exe`.  Alternately, I've been using using `PYTHON=\"py -3\"` to invoke `make`.\n\nI'm not sure what we should do here. We probably can't change the default only for Windows somehow? (My make-fu is not awesome)\n\n> \n> The command issued to the buildbot will need to explicitly use `PYTHON=\"py -2\"` to keep that happy.  Probably also need to invoke `run-tests.py` with the right python too, so that `$PYTHON` is correct.  It looks like the shebang lines are already `$PYTHON`, through some aren't quoted.\n\nOkay, I'll see about wiring that up tonight or tomorrow then. I believe that's the only (other) thing blocking this?\n\n> \n> CC @durin42\n\n","author":"durin42","id":"106995","dateCreated":"1573158555","dateModified":"1573158555"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This will break Windows by default, because py3 is still named `python.exe`.  Alternately, I've been using using `PYTHON=\"py -3\"` to invoke `make`.\n\nThe command issued to the buildbot will need to explicitly use `PYTHON=\"py -2\"` to keep that happy.  Probably also need to invoke `run-tests.py` with the right python too, so that `$PYTHON` is correct.  It looks like the shebang lines are already `$PYTHON`, through some aren't quoted.\n\nCC @durin42","author":"mharbison72","id":"106950","dateCreated":"1573144562","dateModified":"1573144562"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D7258#106380, @martinvonz wrote:\n> All tests except for `test-check-py3-compat.t` pass on py3 (on Linux), right?\n\nYes, tests are clean on Python 3.6 and 3.7. See https:\/\/ci.hg.gregoryszorc.com\/.","author":"indygreg","id":"106704","dateCreated":"1573113816","dateModified":"1573113816"},{"type":"comment","comment":"All tests except for `test-check-py3-compat.t` pass on py3 (on Linux), right?","author":"martinvonz","id":"106380","dateCreated":"1573066343","dateModified":"1573066343"},{"type":"accept","author":"martinvonz","id":"106379","dateCreated":"1573066343","dateModified":"1573066343"},{"type":"update","diffId":"17627","author":"indygreg","id":"106370","dateCreated":"1573065798","dateModified":"1573065798"}],"dateCreated":"1573065798","dateModified":"1581535650","status":"Accepted"},{"id":"7942","callsign":"HG","title":"py3: make test-http-bad-server.t conditional on Python 3.6+","author":"indygreg","summary":"I'm not sure what's going on here, but we need to limit these lines\nto a Python 3.6 version range check because Python 3.5's behavior\nis subtly different. We already had some lines conditional on\nPython 3.5+ and 3.6+. I guess whoever made this test pass on 3.6+\nforgot to test on 3.5+.\n\nWith this change, the test harness is clean on Python 3.5 on Linux\non my machine.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"10","dependsOn":["7941"],"reviewers":["pulkit","marmoute"],"ccs":["mjpieters","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"accept","author":"marmoute","id":"119441","dateCreated":"1580944098","dateModified":"1580944098"},{"type":"accept","author":"pulkit","id":"116764","dateCreated":"1579528946","dateModified":"1579528946"},{"type":"update","diffId":"19446","author":"indygreg","id":"116676","dateCreated":"1579333363","dateModified":"1579333363"}],"dateCreated":"1579333363","dateModified":"1580944098","status":"Accepted"},{"id":"7940","callsign":"HG","title":"py3: make flush() line optional","author":"indygreg","summary":"This line only appears on Python 3.5, not on 2.7 or 3.6+. Why, I have\nno clue. I suspect a weird regression in the bowels of Python's\nI\/O system.\n\nOur test format doesn't support combining conditionals. So I add\npyexactXY checks to check for an exact major.minor Python version.\nSadly, this won't be the only test requiring an exception for\nPython 3.5.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"12","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["pulkit","marmoute"],"ccs":["marmoute","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"inline","comment":"\n+1 are we missing anything that prevent this to be used?","replyTo":"116766","isNewFile":"1","line":"114","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-ssh-proto.t","diffId":"19444","author":"marmoute","id":"119439","dateCreated":"1580943965","dateModified":"1580943965"},{"type":"inline","comment":"can we pre-generate more python version ? It help running \"current\" extension test againts \"older\" mercurial version.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"783","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/hghave.py","diffId":"19444","author":"marmoute","id":"119438","dateCreated":"1580943965","dateModified":"1580943965"},{"type":"reject","author":"marmoute","id":"119437","dateCreated":"1580943965","dateModified":"1580943965"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Reviewing later patches, I see that `(py3 no-py3.6)` can be used for this.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"114","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-ssh-proto.t","diffId":"19444","author":"pulkit","id":"116766","dateCreated":"1579529000","dateModified":"1579529000"},{"type":"accept","author":"pulkit","id":"116758","dateCreated":"1579528720","dateModified":"1579528720"},{"type":"update","diffId":"19444","author":"indygreg","id":"116660","dateCreated":"1579333360","dateModified":"1579333360"}],"dateCreated":"1579333360","dateModified":"1580943966","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"7176","callsign":"HG","title":"rebase: allow rebasing obsolete commit without successor","author":"martinvonz","summary":"When trying to rebase an obsolete whose successors are also all\nobsolete, we would skip it and tell the user that it would have caused\ndivergence. That is not correct. We could just change the message, but\nI don't see any harm in rebasing such commits. It even seems like a\nreasonable way to make it not obsolete. So this patch makes that type\nof rebase allowed.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"9","dependsOn":["7175"],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["marmoute","khanchi97","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"118730","dateCreated":"1580407580","dateModified":"1580407580"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"118729","dateCreated":"1580407580","dateModified":"1580407580"},{"type":"comment","comment":"That is not necessarly True, If the changeset is pruned, but successors of a public changeset, rebasing it would create phase-divergence. @khanchi97 fixed similar cases in September.\n\nOverall, we should migrate the rebase code to use the `precheck` logic in rewrite util (and make sure things are well covered there).\n\nOne can read more about current Sushil work in this area here: https:\/\/www.mercurial-scm.org\/wiki\/CEDPrecheckPlan.","author":"marmoute","id":"105351","dateCreated":"1572465579","dateModified":"1572465579"},{"type":"update","diffId":"17409","author":"martinvonz","id":"105299","dateCreated":"1572050933","dateModified":"1572050933"}],"dateCreated":"1572050933","dateModified":"1580407580","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"3896","callsign":"HG","title":"copies: handle case when both merge cset are not descendant of merge base","author":"pulkit","summary":"There can be cases when both the changesets which we are merging are not\ndescendants of the merge base. In those cases dirtyc1 and dirtyc2 both will be\ntrue. The existing code assumes that either of them will be true always but that\nis not a right assumption.\n\nI found this while working with content-divergence resolution. In\ncontent-divergence resolution, we use the common predecessor as the merge base\nfor resolving content divergence and there it can be possible that the merge\nbase is not the descendant of both the content-divergence changsets.\n\nThe code in content-divergence which does this is at:\nhttps:\/\/www.mercurial-scm.org\/repo\/evolve\/file\/b81fd1487e04\/hgext3rd\/evolve\/evolvecmd.py#l507","testPlan":"","lineCount":"5","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["martinvonz","spectral","yuja","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"Pretty sure this was made obsolete by D6255","author":"martinvonz","id":"118457","dateCreated":"1580315479","dateModified":"1580315479"},{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117663","dateCreated":"1579887172","dateModified":"1579887172"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117662","dateCreated":"1579887172","dateModified":"1579887172"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D3896#65986, @spectral wrote:\n> Any updates on this?  I'm poking at updating this function in core, and not too excited to have to also modify the copy in evolve that seems to have spawned :\/\n\nI am yet to write tests. Feel free to update the one in core, I will take care of the evolve copy.","author":"pulkit","id":"66180","dateCreated":"1534428512","dateModified":"1534428512"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Any updates on this?  I'm poking at updating this function in core, and not too excited to have to also modify the copy in evolve that seems to have spawned :\/","author":"spectral","id":"65987","dateCreated":"1534370496","dateModified":"1534370496"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Can you add some tests that make both `dirtyc1` and `dirtyc2` set, and\ntrigger copy tracing?\n\n> Since we can have both dirtyc1, and dirtyc2 true, I am not sure whether\n> this else should be turned into it's own if statement?\n\nNo idea. I doubt if the current copy tracing can handle such cases. From\nmy vague memory, the current algorithm relies on the fact that the pseudo\n`base` revision exists in between the `c1` and the `c2`.","author":"yuja","id":"60811","dateCreated":"1531138991","dateModified":"1531138991"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Since we can have both dirtyc1, and dirtyc2 true, I am not sure whether this else should be turned into it's own if statement?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"496","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/copies.py","diffId":"9471","author":"pulkit","id":"60802","dateCreated":"1531041256","dateModified":"1531041256"},{"type":"update","diffId":"9471","author":"pulkit","id":"60797","dateCreated":"1531041116","dateModified":"1531041116"}],"dateCreated":"1531041116","dateModified":"1580315479","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"1700","callsign":"HG","title":"logtoprocess: pass ui in runshellcommand","author":"lothiraldan","summary":"We are gonna read a configuration specific to Windows, instead of adding a\nuseless arguments for runshellcommand on linux, pass the ui object to read it\ndirectly.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"6","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117739","dateCreated":"1579887208","dateModified":"1579887208"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117738","dateCreated":"1579887208","dateModified":"1579887208"},{"type":"update","diffId":"4467","author":"lothiraldan","id":"29023","dateCreated":"1513332655","dateModified":"1513332655"}],"dateCreated":"1513332655","dateModified":"1579887208","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"1752","callsign":"HG","title":"tests: show phases aren't preserved part of streaming clone (issue5648)","author":"indygreg","summary":"draft and secret changesets are promoted to public changesets when\ntransferred via a stream clone. That's not desirable behavior. Add\ntests demonstrating it.\n\nAs far as I can tell, this buggy behavior has been present since\nphases were introduced. Stream clone predated phases (1.7 versus 1.9)\nand stream clone was never taught to be phase aware.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"65","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117733","dateCreated":"1579887204","dateModified":"1579887204"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117732","dateCreated":"1579887204","dateModified":"1579887204"},{"type":"update","diffId":"4602","author":"indygreg","id":"29880","dateCreated":"1514138808","dateModified":"1514138808"}],"dateCreated":"1514138808","dateModified":"1579887205","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"1765","callsign":"HG","title":"parsers: use an attr-derived class for revlog index entries","author":"indygreg","summary":"Currently, revlog index entries are tuples.\n\nThis commit introduces a new type to represent revlog v1 index\nentries. The pure Python parser has been converted to use it.\n\nTo provide backwards compatibility with existing code (including the\nC extension), the type has a __getitem__ to facilitate index\nlookups. The intent is to remove this __getitem__ once all consumers\nare using named attributes.\n\nSince the pure Python index parser is now using our new type,\ntest-parseindex2.py had to be updated to deal with the type mismatch.\nOnce all index parsers are converted and the new type\/interface is\nubiquitous, we can restore the simplicity of test-parseindex2.py. We\nalso had to (temporarily) add \"# no-check-code\" to test-parseindex2.py\nto allow the import of the pure module. This will be removed once the C\nextension is ported.\n\nBecause consumers are going through an extra Python function call to\n__getitem__ to resolve attributes by index, this change regresses\nperformance on a simple DAG walking revset for the Firefox repository:\n\n$ HGMODULEPOLICY=py hg perfrevset '::tip'\n! wall 1.366281 comb 1.360000 user 1.360000 sys 0.000000 (best of 7)\n! wall 1.860068 comb 1.860000 user 1.860000 sys 0.000000 (best of 5)\n\nUsing PyPy, a major regression is not apparent:\n\n! wall 0.163141 comb 0.160000 user 0.160000 sys 0.000000 (best of 56)\n! wall 0.154325 comb 0.160000 user 0.160000 sys 0.000000 (best of 54)","testPlan":"","lineCount":"70","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["yuja","durin42","baymax"],"ccs":["yuja","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117730","dateCreated":"1579887202","dateModified":"1579887202"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117729","dateCreated":"1579887202","dateModified":"1579887202"},{"type":"accept","author":"durin42","id":"31062","dateCreated":"1515624886","dateModified":"1515624886"},{"type":"update","diffId":"4735","author":"indygreg","id":"30856","dateCreated":"1515227175","dateModified":"1515227175"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Perhaps you mean `list(map(...))` instead of a list of one element?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"182","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-parseindex2.py","diffId":"4626","author":"yuja","id":"30602","dateCreated":"1515124211","dateModified":"1515124211"},{"type":"reject","author":"yuja","id":"30601","dateCreated":"1515124211","dateModified":"1515124211"},{"type":"update","diffId":"4626","author":"indygreg","id":"30049","dateCreated":"1514334949","dateModified":"1514334949"}],"dateCreated":"1514334949","dateModified":"1579887202","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"1767","callsign":"HG","title":"cext: make nullentry a member of index types","author":"indygreg","summary":"An upcoming commit will change the type of index entries from tuple\nto something else. This type may not be initialized\/available at\nmodule init time.\n\nWe prepare for this future change by making null entries a per-instance\nvariable on the index type.\n\nIn theory, this does add some overhead (a new 8-tuple per index\ninstance). However, the overhead should be negligible compared to\nthe run-time overhead of creating an index entry for each revision\nin the index.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"19","dependsOn":["1766"],"reviewers":["yuja","durin42","baymax"],"ccs":["yuja","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117727","dateCreated":"1579887200","dateModified":"1579887200"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117726","dateCreated":"1579887200","dateModified":"1579887200"},{"type":"accept","author":"durin42","id":"31065","dateCreated":"1515624888","dateModified":"1515624888"},{"type":"update","diffId":"4736","author":"indygreg","id":"30859","dateCreated":"1515227176","dateModified":"1515227176"},{"type":"inline","comment":"This comment shouldn't be moved. We need to NULLify all attributes, but don't\nhave to create PyObject.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"1876","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/cext\/revlog.c","diffId":"4628","author":"yuja","id":"30606","dateCreated":"1515124415","dateModified":"1515124415"},{"type":"reject","author":"yuja","id":"30605","dateCreated":"1515124415","dateModified":"1515124415"},{"type":"update","diffId":"4628","author":"indygreg","id":"30069","dateCreated":"1514334953","dateModified":"1514334953"}],"dateCreated":"1514334953","dateModified":"1579887200","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"1768","callsign":"HG","title":"cext: obtain reference to index entry type","author":"indygreg","summary":"We recently introduced a dedicated type for index entries in the\npure Python implementation.\n\nThis commit tells the revlog C code about that type.\n\nWe register the type on the parsers module so it is exposed to\nimporters of the module.\n\nIn addition, we store a reference to the type on revlog index\ninstances. In theory, we could grab the reference from the\nmodule. However, this requires a fair bit of C code. It is easier\nto just re-import the original module and get a ref from there. This\nalso avoids problems with caching a type on a reload()d module.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"35","dependsOn":["1767"],"reviewers":["yuja","durin42","baymax"],"ccs":["yuja","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117724","dateCreated":"1579887199","dateModified":"1579887199"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117723","dateCreated":"1579887199","dateModified":"1579887199"},{"type":"accept","author":"durin42","id":"31066","dateCreated":"1515624888","dateModified":"1515624888"},{"type":"update","diffId":"4737","author":"indygreg","id":"30861","dateCreated":"1515227177","dateModified":"1515227177"},{"type":"inline","comment":"In theory, there could be a mismatch.\n\nIf this module is loaded, its `IndexV1Entry` will refer to whatever `mercurial.pure.parsers.IndexV1Entry` is. If `mercurial.pure.parsers` is then reloaded and its `IndexV1Entry` changes and a revlog index type is created, its `IndexV1Entry` will be the new one from the reloaded `mercurial.pure.parsers`.\n\nSince I plan to replace the Python-implemented type with a C backed type, I'm inclined to not care about this.","replyTo":"30611","isNewFile":"1","line":"2117","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/cext\/revlog.c","diffId":"4629","author":"indygreg","id":"30845","dateCreated":"1515222660","dateModified":"1515222660"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Can we be sure that this `IndexV1Entry` is identical to `self->entrytype`\nafter reloading Python modules?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"2117","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/cext\/revlog.c","diffId":"4629","author":"yuja","id":"30611","dateCreated":"1515128067","dateModified":"1515128067"},{"type":"comment","comment":"> We hold off incrementing the version of the \"parsers\" extension\n> because nothing in core relies on the new API yet.\n\nIt's really minor nit, but we have to increment the version since new\ncompiled module doesn't work with old `pure.parsers` module, which\nprovides no IndexV1Entry type.","author":"yuja","id":"30610","dateCreated":"1515128067","dateModified":"1515128067"},{"type":"reject","author":"yuja","id":"30609","dateCreated":"1515128067","dateModified":"1515128067"},{"type":"update","diffId":"4629","author":"indygreg","id":"30079","dateCreated":"1514334955","dateModified":"1514334955"}],"dateCreated":"1514334955","dateModified":"1579887199","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"1769","callsign":"HG","title":"cext: use dedicated type for index entries","author":"indygreg","summary":"Now that we have a handle on our type to represent revlog index\nentries, let's use it.\n\nThis commit essentially consists of porting code from PyTuple to\nPyObject.\n\nAs part of porting the code, we now retrieve elements in the entry\ntype by named attribute instead of integer index.\n\nBefore, PyTuple_* APIs allowed us to retrieve a borrowed reference\nto PyObject elements. We can no longer do this via the PyObject_*\nAPIs for a type not implemented in C. This required extra refcount\nmanipulation in various places.\n\nThe C extension is now emitting the new type. And because various\ncode is still accessing index entry elements via __getitem__, we\nsee a performance regression in the Firefox repository:\n\n$ hg perfrevset '::tip'\n! wall 0.755869 comb 0.750000 user 0.750000 sys 0.000000 (best of 13)\n! wall 1.011107 comb 1.010000 user 1.010000 sys 0.000000 (best of 10)\n\nWe will claw back this regression in subsequent commits by accessing\nfields by name instead of index.\n\nThe version of the \"parsers\" C extension has been incremented to\nreflect the change in behavior.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"123","dependsOn":["1768"],"reviewers":["yuja","durin42","baymax"],"ccs":["yuja","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117721","dateCreated":"1579887198","dateModified":"1579887198"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117720","dateCreated":"1579887198","dateModified":"1579887198"},{"type":"accept","author":"durin42","id":"31067","dateCreated":"1515624889","dateModified":"1515624889"},{"type":"update","diffId":"4738","author":"indygreg","id":"30864","dateCreated":"1515227178","dateModified":"1515227178"},{"type":"inline","comment":"No error reported to the caller.\n\nAttributeError would be set automatically.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"1788","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/cext\/revlog.c","diffId":"4630","author":"yuja","id":"30618","dateCreated":"1515129734","dateModified":"1515129734"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I slightly prefer `goto bail` instead of `result = NULL; goto cleanup` pairs.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"327","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/cext\/revlog.c","diffId":"4630","author":"yuja","id":"30617","dateCreated":"1515129734","dateModified":"1515129734"},{"type":"inline","comment":"This is tricky, but looks okay. Alternatively, we could inc\/decref borrowed `obj`.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"321","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/cext\/revlog.c","diffId":"4630","author":"yuja","id":"30616","dateCreated":"1515129734","dateModified":"1515129734"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Perhaps AttributeError would be set by `PyObject_GetAttrString()`.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"141","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/cext\/revlog.c","diffId":"4630","author":"yuja","id":"30615","dateCreated":"1515129734","dateModified":"1515129734"},{"type":"reject","author":"yuja","id":"30614","dateCreated":"1515129734","dateModified":"1515129734"},{"type":"update","diffId":"4630","author":"indygreg","id":"30089","dateCreated":"1514334957","dateModified":"1514334957"}],"dateCreated":"1514334957","dateModified":"1579887198","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"2158","callsign":"HG","title":"py3: use raw string for open() mode","author":"indygreg","summary":" ","testPlan":"","lineCount":"8","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["yuja","pulkit","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117718","dateCreated":"1579887197","dateModified":"1579887197"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117717","dateCreated":"1579887196","dateModified":"1579887196"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I wanna leave it with no prefix as possible. I think we'll have to bulk-replace\n`''`s to `b''`s at some point so we can leverage static analysis tools, where\n`r''` will be unneeded.","author":"yuja","id":"35990","dateCreated":"1518432079","dateModified":"1518432079"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Looks like a better approach will be to revert this change: https:\/\/www.mercurial-scm.org\/repo\/hg\/rev\/7c54917b31f6. I did that in favor of pycompat.open() and now I think it's better to revert that change. ","author":"pulkit","id":"35944","dateCreated":"1518420826","dateModified":"1518420826"},{"type":"update","diffId":"5459","author":"indygreg","id":"35745","dateCreated":"1518402936","dateModified":"1518402936"}],"dateCreated":"1518402936","dateModified":"1579887197","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"2622","callsign":"HG","title":"ui: adding a generic method to read config items with an arbitrary type","author":"rdamazio","summary":"This can be used for reading many config options of various types where the\ntype of each is known in some other structure (e.g. options matching command\nflags).","testPlan":"","lineCount":"10","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117715","dateCreated":"1579887195","dateModified":"1579887195"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117714","dateCreated":"1579887195","dateModified":"1579887195"},{"type":"update","diffId":"6520","author":"rdamazio","id":"42415","dateCreated":"1520121279","dateModified":"1520121279"}],"dateCreated":"1520121279","dateModified":"1579887195","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"2680","callsign":"HG","title":"[PoC] obsolete: make markers database writable if local-only mode enabled","author":"indygreg","summary":" ","testPlan":"","lineCount":"4","dependsOn":["2679"],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117712","dateCreated":"1579887194","dateModified":"1579887194"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117711","dateCreated":"1579887194","dateModified":"1579887194"},{"type":"update","diffId":"6638","author":"indygreg","id":"43217","dateCreated":"1520210574","dateModified":"1520210574"}],"dateCreated":"1520210574","dateModified":"1579887194","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"2682","callsign":"HG","title":"[PoC] changegroup: delete obs markers when applying changegroup","author":"indygreg","summary":"In local-only obsolescence mode, our short-term hack to unhide a\nchangeset is to delete obsolescence markers causing it to be hidden.\nWe need to do this every time a changeset is introduced into the\nrepository.\n\nI was hoping we could implement the unhide logic once, around\ntransaction close time. However, it appears that we'll need to\nteach every mechanism that introduces changesets to unhide\nchangesets because of interaction between those mechanisms and\nvisibility. For example, changegroup application no-ops on incoming\nchangesets that are present but hidden. The code that scans for\n\"new\" changesets is based on changesets between the old and new\nchangelog length. Since the unhidden changeset is possibly older\nthan the old changelog length, we need to either track unhides\nexplicitly or deal with them specially.\n\nThis commit teaches changegroup application to record which changesets\nare in the incoming changegroup so it can scan for relevant\nobsolescence markers after changegroup applications and delete\ntheir markers.\n\nI'm not convinced this is the best approach to the problem. But it's\na start.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"27","dependsOn":["2681"],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117709","dateCreated":"1579887192","dateModified":"1579887192"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117708","dateCreated":"1579887192","dateModified":"1579887192"},{"type":"update","diffId":"6640","author":"indygreg","id":"43236","dateCreated":"1520210580","dateModified":"1520210580"}],"dateCreated":"1520210580","dateModified":"1579887192","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"2681","callsign":"HG","title":"[PoC] scmutil: support local only obsolescence","author":"indygreg","summary":"Now that we have a config option for enabling local-only obsolescence,\nit is time to do something with it.\n\nThis commit teaches cleanupnodes() - which is called after rewrite\noperations - to handle local only obsolescence mode.\n\nIn this mode, we create a backup bundle of the obsoleted changesets -\njust like what happens if obsolescence is disabled. But we don't strip\nthe repo: we keep the original changesets around in a non-visible state.\n\nThe new code verifies that no unstable changesets are introduced in\nlocal-only obsolescence mode.\n\nThe new code hackily only runs if the action is \"amend.\" The intent\nis to make this conditional only on the feature option. However,\ndoing that would have significant test fallout. So we limit to \"amend\"\nfor now.\n\nTODO:\n\n* Better test coverage (I think the \"(testcase !)\" syntax might be\n  subtly wrong by flagging output as optional and not required).\n* Delete obsolescence markers when we pull and unbundle from the\n  bundle.\n* Support pulling locally-hidden heads.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"143","dependsOn":["2680"],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["mharbison72","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117706","dateCreated":"1579887191","dateModified":"1579887191"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117705","dateCreated":"1579887191","dateModified":"1579887191"},{"type":"comment","comment":"re: the \"(testcase !)\" syntax- I agree that it would be better if \"(false !)\" means the line is *not* present, instead of optional.\n\nI made an attempt to do that, but somehow I came up with a test in test-run-tests.t that failed there, but the exact same test ran fine in another *.t.  I wondered if it was a case of run-tests.py processing it for a test inside test-run-tests.t, and then the main instance of run-tests.py re-processing it.  If I can find that code, I can post it if you think it might be useful.  But I've long forgotten the nuance in that code. ","author":"mharbison72","id":"43337","dateCreated":"1520216552","dateModified":"1520216552"},{"type":"update","diffId":"6639","author":"indygreg","id":"43226","dateCreated":"1520210577","dateModified":"1520210577"}],"dateCreated":"1520210577","dateModified":"1579887191","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"2588","callsign":"HG","title":"commit: adds multiline commit message support(issue5616)","author":"sangeet259","summary":"The earlier functionality used to ignore the all but last -m flag's value.\nIt used to store the arguments information in a state dict and then overwrites each\nsubsequent value of -m in the 'message' key. This patch intercepts the message flag and\nchecks if it is already empty. In case it is not empty, add the current value of -m flag to\nthe message key with a leading '\\n' character. This makes every subsequent passed -m flag\nas the new line message of the commit.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"28","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["durin42","tom.prince","yuja","pulkit","jeffpc","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117703","dateCreated":"1579887189","dateModified":"1579887189"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117702","dateCreated":"1579887189","dateModified":"1579887189"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D2588#44645, @sangeet259 wrote:\n> Since the current code just overwrites message each time with the newer. What can be done to avoid losing the earlier message values?\n\nYou should look how we handle multiple `--rev` flags. That will help you in this case.","author":"pulkit","id":"44677","dateCreated":"1520666278","dateModified":"1520666278"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Since the current code just overwrites message each time with the newer. What can be done to avoid losing the earlier message values?\n","author":"sangeet259","id":"44645","dateCreated":"1520655918","dateModified":"1520655918"},{"type":"inline","comment":"agreed","replyTo":"42705","isNewFile":"1","line":"847","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-commit.t","diffId":"6537","author":"durin42","id":"43618","dateCreated":"1520437801","dateModified":"1520437801"},{"type":"comment","comment":"@pulkit Yeah, this rather a not so elegant hack. How can it be parsed in hg commit? \nAs the first message passed is overwritten by the second one at this step only.  :\/\n\n@yuja I think maybe subclassing the customopt may be a fair choice.","author":"sangeet259","id":"43614","dateCreated":"1520437520","dateModified":"1520437520"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Right. Alternatively, we could add a subclass of customopt, but I don't know which\nwould be nicer.\n\nFWIW, I'm kinda -1 on this feature, but I have no strong opinion and Git is the\ncurrent standard.","replyTo":"42704","isNewFile":"1","line":"365","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/fancyopts.py","diffId":"6537","author":"yuja","id":"42772","dateCreated":"1520184244","dateModified":"1520184244"},{"type":"inline","comment":"starting with a newline seems awkward.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"847","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-commit.t","diffId":"6537","author":"pulkit","id":"42705","dateCreated":"1520181862","dateModified":"1520181862"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I think this is not the right place to have this hack. We should have this as a part of `hg commit` code rather.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"365","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/fancyopts.py","diffId":"6537","author":"pulkit","id":"42704","dateCreated":"1520181862","dateModified":"1520181862"},{"type":"update","diffId":"6537","author":"sangeet259","id":"42559","dateCreated":"1520149348","dateModified":"1520149348"},{"type":"comment","comment":"@jeffpc That means two new lines. Shall I edit this patch to effect that?\n","author":"sangeet259","id":"42558","dateCreated":"1520142981","dateModified":"1520147672"},{"type":"update","diffId":"6536","author":"sangeet259","id":"42557","dateCreated":"1520139879","dateModified":"1520139879"},{"type":"comment","author":"sangeet259","id":"41893","dateCreated":"1520098879","dateModified":"1520098898"},{"type":"comment","comment":"FWIW, this is slightly different behavior from what git does.  There, each -m is added as a separate *paragraph*.  IOW,\n\n\n```\n$ git commit -m \"first\" -m \"second\"\n```\n\ncreates:\n\n```\nfirst\n\nsecond\n```","author":"jeffpc","id":"41892","dateCreated":"1520098727","dateModified":"1520098727"},{"type":"update","diffId":"6438","author":"sangeet259","id":"41882","dateCreated":"1520098029","dateModified":"1520098029"}],"dateCreated":"1520098029","dateModified":"1579887189","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"2057","callsign":"HG","title":"rust implementation of hg status","author":"Ivzhh","summary":"* implementation of revlog v1\n* parsing changelog, manifest, dirstate\n* use .hgignore in repo root\n* comparable performance with current hg status (Linux & Mac: slightly faster, Windows: slightly slower)\n* use hg r-status as subcommand, in this case, bypass python engine","testPlan":"","lineCount":"3066","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["kevincox","baymax"],"ccs":["quark","yuja","glandium","krbullock","indygreg","durin42","kevincox","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117700","dateCreated":"1579887188","dateModified":"1579887188"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117699","dateCreated":"1579887188","dateModified":"1579887188"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I meant safe not as it it didn't need the unsafe keyword, but in that the use of the `unsafe` block is safe.\n\nIt should really be called the `trust_me,_I_know_this_is_safe` block. But since you are not getting the compiler checking it is often useful to add a comment why the action you are performing is correct. In this case it is correct because the caller initializes this variable before the function is called.","replyTo":"46950","isNewFile":"1","line":"91","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgbase85\/src\/base85.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"47428","dateCreated":"1521888284","dateModified":"1521888284"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Actually I didn't realize that RwLock doesn't get a regular `get()` since it is doing a compile time borrow check. https:\/\/doc.rust-lang.org\/std\/sync\/struct.RwLock.html#method.get_mut. My mistake, the code is fine.","replyTo":"46960","isNewFile":"1","line":"136","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/local_repo.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"47427","dateCreated":"1521888284","dateModified":"1521888284"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Does it make sense to make `DirStateEntry.mtime` be a `std::time::SystemTime` and convert upon reading the structure in?\n\nIf not I would prefer doing the conversion here:\n\n```\nelse if mtd.modified().unwrap() == UNIX_EPOCH + Duration::from_secs(dir_entry.mtime as u64) {\n```\n\n(Maybe extract the system time to higher up, or even a helper function on dir_entry)","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"263","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"7188","author":"kevincox","id":"47426","dateCreated":"1521888284","dateModified":"1521888284"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Sorry, I misunderstood the logic. You can do this:\n\n```\ndiff -r ccc683587fdb rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs\n--- a\/rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs\tSat Mar 24 10:05:53 2018 +0000\n+++ b\/rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs\tSat Mar 24 10:14:58 2018 +0000\n@@ -184,8 +184,7 @@\n                         continue;\n                     }\n \n-                    if self.dir_state_map.contains_key(rel_path) {\n-                        let dir_entry = &self.dir_state_map[rel_path];\n+                    if let Some(dir_entry) = self.dir_state_map.get(rel_path) {\n                         files_not_in_walkdir.remove(rel_path);\n                         DirState::check_status(&mut res, abs_path, rel_path, dir_entry);\n                     } else if !matcher.check_path_ignored(rel_path.to_str().unwrap()) {\n```","replyTo":"46959","isNewFile":"1","line":"170","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"47425","dateCreated":"1521888284","dateModified":"1521888284"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Switch the return type to `std::io::Result` and then you can have\n\n```\nlet metadata = p.metadata()?;\nlet mtime = metadata.modified()?;\n\/\/ ...\n```","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"103","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"7188","author":"kevincox","id":"47424","dateCreated":"1521888284","dateModified":"1521888284"},{"type":"inline","comment":"A link to the mentioned wiki page would be very helpful to readers.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"50","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/config.rs","diffId":"7188","author":"kevincox","id":"47423","dateCreated":"1521888284","dateModified":"1521888284"},{"type":"inline","comment":"These are `HashSet`'s which don't have a defined iterator order. IIRC the python implementation sorts the results which is probably desirable.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"260","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgcli\/src\/main.rs","diffId":"7188","author":"kevincox","id":"47422","dateCreated":"1521888284","dateModified":"1521888284"},{"type":"inline","comment":"If this computation only depends on `len` it would be nice to put it in a helper function.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"105","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgbase85\/src\/base85.rs","diffId":"7188","author":"kevincox","id":"47421","dateCreated":"1521888284","dateModified":"1521888284"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I get that, but I still think it makes the code easier to read when the python-interop and the logic as separated where it is easy to do so.","replyTo":"46947","isNewFile":"1","line":"23","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgbase85\/src\/base85.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"47420","dateCreated":"1521888284","dateModified":"1521888284"},{"type":"comment","comment":"The latest changes are looking really good. I have a couple more comments but I didn't have time for a full review. I'll try to get more reviewed tomorrow. It seems that you still have a lot of stuff still in-flight so I'll try to slowly review the changes as I have time. If you want input\/feedback on any particular part just ask and I will prioritize it.\n\nThis change is very large so it might be worth splitting off a smaller component and getting that submitted first. However I do realize that for starting out it is often helpful to get some actual use cases implemented before committing the base structures.","author":"kevincox","id":"47419","dateCreated":"1521888284","dateModified":"1521888284"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D2057#46980, @Ivzhh wrote:\n>>>! In D2057#46726, @yuja wrote:\n>>>> I think the only place where you would need to do os-specific code is when\n>>>> doing serialization and serialization\n>>> \n>>> Yes, that will be feasible in strictly typed language like Rust.\n>> \n>> To be clear, I meant serialization\/deserialization between filesystem path and\n>> internal dirstate\/manifest path, not between dirstate storage and in-memory\n>> dirstate object.\n> \n> I guess your suggestion is like this: @yuja\n> \n> 1. if it is windows and the code page is MBCS, try to decode the paths read from manifest and dirstate into unicode equivalent\n> 2. use utf internally and with rust IO api\n> 3. when writing back to dirstate and manifest, encode utf to MBCS\n\nNo. My suggestion is:\n\n1. keep manifest\/dirstate paths as bytes (which are probably wrapped by some type, say HgPath)\n2. but we want to use Rust's standard library for I\/O\n3. so, add utility function\/trait to convert HgPath to Path\/PathBuf, where MBCS-Wide conversion\n   will occur.\n\nI think raw byte paths will be needed to build store paths (e.g. `.hg\/store\/data\/~2eclang-format.i`).\n\nhttps:\/\/www.mercurial-scm.org\/repo\/hg\/file\/4.5.2\/mercurial\/store.py","author":"yuja","id":"47287","dateCreated":"1521730814","dateModified":"1521730814"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D2057#46726, @yuja wrote:\n>>> I think the only place where you would need to do os-specific code is when\n>>> doing serialization and serialization\n>> \n>> Yes, that will be feasible in strictly typed language like Rust.\n> \n> To be clear, I meant serialization\/deserialization between filesystem path and\n> internal dirstate\/manifest path, not between dirstate storage and in-memory\n> dirstate object.\n\nI guess your suggestion is like this: @yuja\n\n1. if it is windows and the code page is MBCS, try to decode the paths read from manifest and dirstate into unicode equivalent\n2. use utf internally and with rust IO api\n3. when writing back to dirstate and manifest, encode utf to MBCS\n\nPlease let me know if I have misunderstanding. Thank you!","author":"Ivzhh","id":"46981","dateCreated":"1521662441","dateModified":"1521662461"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I guess I did this because I met some empty change delta in the beginning. I think I won't try to parallelize unzip for now.","replyTo":"43866","isNewFile":"1","line":"290","lineLength":"3","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/revlog_v1.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"Ivzhh","id":"46964","dateCreated":"1521658541","dateModified":"1521658541"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I think it explains why in mercurial repo, rust version is significantly faster. I am working on cpu future, but I did not finalize design style yet. I will keep working on that.","replyTo":"43867","isNewFile":"1","line":"279","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/revlog_v1.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"Ivzhh","id":"46963","dateCreated":"1521658541","dateModified":"1521658541"},{"type":"inline","comment":"This part, including the stream-style, is from python part. I will update later with xi-rope.","replyTo":"43969","isNewFile":"1","line":"51","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/mpatch.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"Ivzhh","id":"46962","dateCreated":"1521658541","dateModified":"1521658541"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I borrow this logic as whole from python code. It will need sometime to re-translate to non-pointer-arithmetic way.","replyTo":"43949","isNewFile":"1","line":"14","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/matcher.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"Ivzhh","id":"46961","dateCreated":"1521658541","dateModified":"1521658541"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I think LRU will update reference count (or timestamp) when the data is accessed.","replyTo":"43942","isNewFile":"1","line":"136","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/local_repo.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"Ivzhh","id":"46960","dateCreated":"1521658541","dateModified":"1521658541"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I kind of get borrow check compile error here. Later I use Occupied() when possible.","replyTo":"43930","isNewFile":"1","line":"170","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"Ivzhh","id":"46959","dateCreated":"1521658541","dateModified":"1521658541"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I add the error handling back","replyTo":"43923","isNewFile":"1","line":"161","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"Ivzhh","id":"46958","dateCreated":"1521658541","dateModified":"1521658541"},{"type":"inline","comment":"For the filter, I follow the example in the walkdir doc. I guess what I want is to skip the dir for later recursive visiting. ","replyTo":"43921","isNewFile":"1","line":"152","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"Ivzhh","id":"46957","dateCreated":"1521658541","dateModified":"1521658541"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I think dir state needs to 1. read existing one; 2. create one if not exits; maybe private for now.","replyTo":"43916","isNewFile":"1","line":"108","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"Ivzhh","id":"46956","dateCreated":"1521658541","dateModified":"1521658541"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I remember the python hg uses the name, in the beginning, I tried to replicate py-hg's behaviour. But I think it needs to be renamed. I agree with you.","replyTo":"43928","isNewFile":"1","line":"48","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"Ivzhh","id":"46955","dateCreated":"1521658541","dateModified":"1521658541"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I like to_owned(), I will them in later occasions. Thank you!","replyTo":"43913","isNewFile":"1","line":"78","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/config.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"Ivzhh","id":"46954","dateCreated":"1521658541","dateModified":"1521658541"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Sure, I will use v1 only for now. In the beginning I kinda over designed this part.","replyTo":"43865","isNewFile":"1","line":"95","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/config.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"Ivzhh","id":"46953","dateCreated":"1521658541","dateModified":"1521658541"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I guess I will use the rest info later. hg seems put some meta data in the commit comments. I will keep it for now. Thank you!","replyTo":"43911","isNewFile":"1","line":"31","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/changelog.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"Ivzhh","id":"46952","dateCreated":"1521658541","dateModified":"1521658541"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Thank you for the suggestion! I guess I need to extend clap later to support hg style command line. Right now whenever clap cannot handle the argument parsing, I will redirect the arguments to hg directly.","replyTo":"43864","isNewFile":"1","line":"233","lineLength":"28","path":"rust\/hgcli\/src\/main.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"Ivzhh","id":"46951","dateCreated":"1521658541","dateModified":"1521658541"},{"type":"inline","comment":"when I removed the unsafe, I got error: error[E0133]: use of mutable static requires unsafe function or block","replyTo":"43908","isNewFile":"1","line":"91","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgbase85\/src\/base85.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"Ivzhh","id":"46950","dateCreated":"1521658541","dateModified":"1521658541"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I guess it is because NLL. When I started the work, rust compiler reported borrow check error on this part. I later read an article talking about NLL update in rust. But before that, I use the braces to avoid the error.","replyTo":"43901","isNewFile":"1","line":"46","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgbase85\/src\/base85.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"Ivzhh","id":"46949","dateCreated":"1521658541","dateModified":"1521658541"},{"type":"inline","comment":"pad is a bool, however when I checked it in hg-python, int are passed to the function. I guess I need to update cpython wrapper for this, a more broad logic conversion.","replyTo":"43900","isNewFile":"1","line":"23","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgbase85\/src\/base85.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"Ivzhh","id":"46948","dateCreated":"1521658541","dateModified":"1521658541"},{"type":"inline","comment":"This crate is my previous try to integrate rust into hg. Right now I guess mine main pursue is to add hg r-* commands for rust. I will follow your suggestion when I am implementing the wire protocol and reuse the code for pure rust crate.","replyTo":"43897","isNewFile":"1","line":"23","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgbase85\/src\/base85.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"Ivzhh","id":"46947","dateCreated":"1521658541","dateModified":"1521658541"},{"type":"inline","comment":"It should be any &[u8], but the current cpython crate doesn't wrap for &[u8]. I think I need to fork and add that part. I put it in my checklist now.","replyTo":"43898","isNewFile":"1","line":"23","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgbase85\/src\/base85.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"Ivzhh","id":"46946","dateCreated":"1521658541","dateModified":"1521658541"},{"type":"comment","comment":"  - add revlog and mpatch facilities\n  - add changelog parsing\n  - add manifest parsing\n  - path encoding for data store\n  - add dirstate and matcher facilities\n  - add local repository and the supporting modules\n  - use cargo fmt to format code\n  - add hg r-status command\n  - bincode 1.0.0 is a bit slow in my test\n  - delay pattern matching during dir walk\n  - optimize out trie and enable CoreXL profiling\n  - use hashmap\n  - remove thread pool\n  - rust default read is not buf-ed, this is the key of slowness\n  - change to globset\n  - convert glob to regex\n  - hg ignore patterns are all converted to regex (as hg does), and now it is faster\n  - filter dir early to prevent walking\n  - Update matcher mod after testing Mozilla unified repo\n  - bug fix: use byte literals instead of numbers\n  - hg store path encoding is per byte style, update code according to Kevin Cox's comments\n  - update matcher testing according to Match interface change\n  - If clap fails to recognize r-* subcommands, then run python-version hg\n  - changelog coding style revised\n  - remove legacy revlog v0 and unfinished v2.\n  - partially revise the dirstate reviews\n  - remove duplicated build.rs, let the executable module guarantee the python\n  - use cursor in base85 encoding, reducing raw index-math\n  - use cursor in base85 decoding, reducing raw index-math\n  - dirstate update according to review comments\n  - config update according to review comments\n  - mpatch rename to more meaningful names\n  - simplify matcher as when there is no syntax named in the beginning, use regexp\n  - local repo coding style update\n  - dirstate coding style update\n  - manifest coding style update\n","author":"Ivzhh","id":"46944","dateCreated":"1521656608","dateModified":"1521656608"},{"type":"update","diffId":"7188","author":"Ivzhh","id":"46942","dateCreated":"1521656608","dateModified":"1521656608"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Ah, I forgot to consider the python interop. Now the need for that crate makes sense. Thanks for explaining.","author":"kevincox","id":"46733","dateCreated":"1521627628","dateModified":"1521627628"},{"type":"comment","comment":">> I think the only place where you would need to do os-specific code is when\n>> doing serialization and serialization\n> \n> Yes, that will be feasible in strictly typed language like Rust.\n\nTo be clear, I meant serialization\/deserialization between filesystem path and\ninternal dirstate\/manifest path, not between dirstate storage and in-memory\ndirstate object.","author":"yuja","id":"46726","dateCreated":"1521613817","dateModified":"1521613817"},{"type":"comment","comment":"> I think the only place where you would need to do os-specific code is when\n> doing serialization and serialization\n\nYes, that will be feasible in strictly typed language like Rust.\n\n> which I think should be handled by https:\/\/doc.rust-lang.org\/std\/os\/unix\/ffi\/trait.OsStringExt.html\n> and https:\/\/doc.rust-lang.org\/std\/os\/windows\/ffi\/trait.OsStringExt.html.\n\nNot true for Windows because Rust uses Unicode (UTF-16-ish) API, whereas\nPython 2 does ANSI. We need to convert a \"wide\" string to a locale-dependent string.\n\nMaybe the local-encoding crate will do that for us?\n\n","author":"yuja","id":"46723","dateCreated":"1521607475","dateModified":"1521607475"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I'm not a windows expert but it seems like the rust OsStr, Path and filesystem APIs should handle these conversions for you. I think the only place where you would need to do os-specific code is when doing serialization and serialization which I think should be handled by https:\/\/doc.rust-lang.org\/std\/os\/unix\/ffi\/trait.OsStringExt.html and https:\/\/doc.rust-lang.org\/std\/os\/windows\/ffi\/trait.OsStringExt.html.","author":"kevincox","id":"46685","dateCreated":"1521577349","dateModified":"1521577349"},{"type":"comment","comment":"https:\/\/crates.io\/crates\/local-encoding seems to be the right choice.","author":"quark","id":"46681","dateCreated":"1521573831","dateModified":"1521573831"},{"type":"comment","comment":"> I am looking at Mozilla's rust winapi bindings, let me see if I can directly wrap around [winapi::um::fileapi::FindFirstFileA](https:\/\/docs.rs\/winapi\/*\/x86_64-pc-windows-msvc\/winapi\/um\/fileapi\/fn.FindFirstFileA.html)\n\nThat's probably a hard way. I was thinking of something converting\nbetween OsStr (i.e. Path) and MBCS bytes by using Win32 API, instead\nof calling out the \"A\" API.\n\nhttps:\/\/msdn.microsoft.com\/en-us\/library\/windows\/desktop\/dd319072(v=vs.85).aspx\n\nWe don't do that in Python, but Rust's type system will help making it right.","author":"yuja","id":"44688","dateCreated":"1520680806","dateModified":"1520680806"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D2057#44269, @yuja wrote:\n>>> Reading that page it seems to claim that filenames should be utf8, not bytes. If utf8, this is what the code does, but if it is bytes that definitely won't work.\n>> \n>> IIRC it's bytes everyplace except Windows, where we pretend utf8 is real?\n> \n> It's MBCS (i.e. ANSI multi-byte characters) on Windows. The plain was to support\n> both MBCS and UTF-8-variant on Windows, but that isn't a thing yet.\n> \n> Perhaps we'll have to write a platform compatibility layer (or serialization\/deserialization\n> layer) on top of the Rust's file API, something like vfs.py we have in Python code.\n\nThank you for confirming that, I am a bit confusing when I read Encoding Plan wiki page. I am looking at Mozilla's rust winapi bindings, let me see if I can directly wrap around [winapi::um::fileapi::FindFirstFileA](https:\/\/docs.rs\/winapi\/*\/x86_64-pc-windows-msvc\/winapi\/um\/fileapi\/fn.FindFirstFileA.html)","author":"Ivzhh","id":"44295","dateCreated":"1520618349","dateModified":"1520618349"},{"type":"comment","comment":">> Reading that page it seems to claim that filenames should be utf8, not bytes. If utf8, this is what the code does, but if it is bytes that definitely won't work.\n> \n> IIRC it's bytes everyplace except Windows, where we pretend utf8 is real?\n\nIt's MBCS (i.e. ANSI multi-byte characters) on Windows. The plain was to support\nboth MBCS and UTF-8-variant on Windows, but that isn't a thing yet.\n\nPerhaps we'll have to write a platform compatibility layer (or serialization\/deserialization\nlayer) on top of the Rust's file API, something like vfs.py we have in Python code.","author":"yuja","id":"44270","dateCreated":"1520598781","dateModified":"1520598781"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Hi everyone,\n\nThank you for your encouragements and comments! I will follow up with all comments and update the code soon.\n\n@indygreg It is a great idea to test on Mozilla repo, actually I found several things interesting:\n\n1. I found a bug in my code (shame on me): because I did not use byte literal, and I made a typo. This triggers problem in Mozilla unified repo\n2. A regexp pattern in hgignore in Mozilla unified repo is not supported by rust's regex crate, a.k.a. \"(?!)\". I choose to ignore these unsupported patterns.\n3. My version is slower in this repo: 70s (hg) and 90s (mine). CodeXL reveals that the mpatch::collect() function uses 63% of the running time. I think I need to optimize it somehow.\n\nI totally agree with @kevincox that I did not sort well on char\/u8\/str\/String\/Path\/PathBuf. The first bug is caused by this. I need to improve them.\n\nThank you everyone!","author":"Ivzhh","id":"44180","dateCreated":"1520558265","dateModified":"1520558265"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Rust has platform independent types [[ https:\/\/doc.rust-lang.org\/stable\/std\/path\/struct.PathBuf.html | `PathBuf` ]] and [[ https:\/\/doc.rust-lang.org\/stable\/std\/path\/struct.Path.html | `&Path` ]] for paths and [[ https:\/\/doc.rust-lang.org\/stable\/std\/ffi\/struct.OsString.html | `OsString` ]] and [[ https:\/\/doc.rust-lang.org\/stable\/std\/ffi\/struct.OsStr.html | `&OsStr` ]] for strings (owned and references respectively. They do have os-specific extensions but as long as you don't use them it should be cross platform. That being said, if you are serializing and deserializing them you may need to write some platform dependant code.","author":"kevincox","id":"43991","dateCreated":"1520536377","dateModified":"1520536377"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D2057#43989, @durin42 wrote:\n>>>! In D2057#43988, @kevincox wrote:\n>>>>! In D2057#43987, @durin42 wrote:\n>>> \n>>> Mercurial tries to be principled about always treating filenames as bytes. AIUI https:\/\/www.mercurial-scm.org\/wiki\/WindowsUTF8Plan is still the plan of record there?\n>> \n>> Reading that page it seems to claim that filenames should be utf8, not bytes. If utf8, this is what the code does, but if it is bytes that definitely won't work.\n> \n> IIRC it's bytes everyplace except Windows, where we pretend utf8 is real?\n> \n> We may have to make adjustments to this plan on macOS with APFS, but I'm not sure about that yet.\n\nI think we want to express a path as a dedicated type which has different underlying storage depending on the platform (bytes on Linux, UTF-16 on Windows). All filesystem operations should take a `Path` instance to operate on. This is the only way to cleanly round trip filenames between the OS, the application, and back to the OS. That leaves us with the hard problem of normalizing Mercurial's storage representation of paths (bytes) with the operating system's. But this world is strictly better than today, where we lose path data from the OS because we use POSIX APIs.\n\nFWIW, Python 3 rewrote the I\/O layer to use Win32 APIs everywhere. Combined with the `pathlib` types, I'm pretty sure Python 3 can round trip paths on Windows. I also think Rust's path type(s) have OS-dependent functionality.","author":"indygreg","id":"43990","dateCreated":"1520534077","dateModified":"1520534077"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D2057#43988, @kevincox wrote:\n>>>! In D2057#43987, @durin42 wrote:\n>> \n>> Mercurial tries to be principled about always treating filenames as bytes. AIUI https:\/\/www.mercurial-scm.org\/wiki\/WindowsUTF8Plan is still the plan of record there?\n> \n> Reading that page it seems to claim that filenames should be utf8, not bytes. If utf8, this is what the code does, but if it is bytes that definitely won't work.\n\nIIRC it's bytes everyplace except Windows, where we pretend utf8 is real?\n\nWe may have to make adjustments to this plan on macOS with APFS, but I'm not sure about that yet.","author":"durin42","id":"43989","dateCreated":"1520533145","dateModified":"1520533145"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D2057#43987, @durin42 wrote:\n> \n> Mercurial tries to be principled about always treating filenames as bytes. AIUI https:\/\/www.mercurial-scm.org\/wiki\/WindowsUTF8Plan is still the plan of record there?\n\nReading that page it seems to claim that filenames should be utf8, not bytes. If utf8, this is what the code does, but if it is bytes that definitely won't work.","author":"kevincox","id":"43988","dateCreated":"1520532520","dateModified":"1520532520"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D2057#43892, @kevincox wrote:\n> On a higher level, all of these code appears to be treating file names as strings. This isn't really true and will disallow some valid file names. Maybe we should stick with bytes throughout. Of course this makes windows filepaths difficult because they are actually (utf16) strings.\n\nMercurial tries to be principled about always treating filenames as bytes. AIUI https:\/\/www.mercurial-scm.org\/wiki\/WindowsUTF8Plan is still the plan of record there?","author":"durin42","id":"43987","dateCreated":"1520531899","dateModified":"1520531899"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Take a `&str`.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"62","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/path_encoding.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43985","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"```\nfn escape(out: &mut String, b: char) {\n    unimplemented!()\n}\n\npub fn encode_path(path: &str) -> String {\n    let mut out = String::with_capacity(path.len());\n\n    for c in path.bytes() {\n        let c = c as char;\n        match c {\n            'A'...'Z' => {\n                out.push('_');\n                out.push(c.to_ascii_lowercase());\n            }\n            '\\\\' | ':' | '*' | '?' | '\"' | '<' | '>' | '|' => {\n                escape(&mut out, c);\n            }\n            \/\/ The rest of the printable range.\n            ' '...'~' => {\n                out.push(c);\n            }\n            _ => {\n                escape(&mut out, c);\n            }\n        }\n    }\n\n    out\n}\n```\nhttps:\/\/godbolt.org\/g\/3WCQs3","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"57","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/path_encoding.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43984","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Don't pass a `char` by reference. Also it seems your function wants a `u8`.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"11","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/path_encoding.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43983","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Use a String.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"35","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/path_encoding.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43982","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"`encode_file_name`?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"34","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/path_encoding.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43981","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Take a `&str`","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"34","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/path_encoding.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43980","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"```\np.ends_with(\".i\") || p.ends_with(\".d\")\n```","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"25","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/path_encoding.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43979","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"This isn't necessary.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"23","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/path_encoding.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43978","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I don't think you need this.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"22","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/path_encoding.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43977","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"`Vec<char>` is odd. Is there any reason not to use a `String` or `Vec<u8>`","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"11","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/path_encoding.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43976","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"c should be a `u8`.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"7","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/path_encoding.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43975","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"const HEX_DIGIT: [u8; 16] = *b\"0123456789abcdef\";","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"5","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/path_encoding.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43974","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"```\nassert!(!frags.is_empty());\n```","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"137","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/mpatch.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43973","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Please explain.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"120","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/mpatch.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43972","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Make this one line and don't bother renaming.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"86","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/mpatch.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43971","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"```\nfor &Fragment{frag_len, frag_ofs} in list.iter().rev()\n```","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"68","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/mpatch.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43970","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"It seems weird to take a cursor to a vec if you are just going to do an absolute seek. Can it work with `&mut [u8]`?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"51","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/mpatch.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43969","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"`vec![0; count]` works. (The arguments might be the other way around).","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"54","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/mpatch.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43968","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"`mov` is overly shortened and generic.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"51","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/mpatch.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43967","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"`pull` is very generic.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"35","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/mpatch.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43966","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"```\nstruct Fragment {\n    len: u32,\n    offset: u32,\n}\n```","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"24","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/mpatch.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43965","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"s\/f\/fragment\/","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"40","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/mpatch.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43964","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"If you are unwrapping the `pop` there is no need for the prior check.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"40","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/mpatch.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43963","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Maybe it's just me but I think it is more common to put the source before the destination.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"35","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/mpatch.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43962","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"```\nassert!(!src.is_empty())\n```","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"39","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/mpatch.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43961","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Spell these out please.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"13","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/mpatch.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43960","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I would do `self.inner.map(|m| m.is_match(rp)).unwrap_or(false)` but this is fine.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"200","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/matcher.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43959","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"s\/rp\/path\/","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"195","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/matcher.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43958","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"s\/relglob\/relative_glob_re\/","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"108","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/matcher.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43957","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Is this a warning or error? You might want to switch to `panic!`.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"159","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/matcher.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43956","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I would move this into the following match because it dedupes the `starts_with` check and puts the logic closer together.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"160","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/matcher.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43955","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"s\/ln\/line\/","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"143","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/matcher.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43954","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Better name please.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"131","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/matcher.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43953","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"You should be able to do `&string` rather then `string.as_str()` as it coerces. ","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"111","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/matcher.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43952","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"If you are just doing one call just return the result.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"111","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/matcher.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43951","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"If you are going to call `String.as_str()` just take a `&str`.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"108","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/matcher.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43950","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Can you manage a `&[u8]` rather then pointer arithmetic for the whole string. It will make me feel better and will probably be easier to read.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"14","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/matcher.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43949","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Might be worth calling `String::with_capacity(pat.len())` since it will be at least that long.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"10","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/matcher.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43948","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"s\/pat\/glob\/","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"9","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/matcher.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43947","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"What are these numbers?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"49","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/manifest.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43946","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"s\/ent\/entry\/","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"42","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/manifest.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43945","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"What are these magic numbers?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"33","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/manifest.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43944","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"This test has no assetions. Consider calling it `test_create_...` or something to indicate that you are just checking for panics.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"155","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/local_repo.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43943","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Why does it need to be mutable to clone?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"136","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/local_repo.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43942","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"s\/fp\/path\/","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"121","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/local_repo.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43941","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"`gd` is cryptic.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"129","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/local_repo.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43940","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"```\nassert!(abspath.exists(), \"path not exists: {:?}\", abspath);\n```","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"127","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/local_repo.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43939","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"```\nwhile !root.join(\".hg\").exists() {\n    root = root.parent().expect(\".hg folder not found\");\n}\n```","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"66","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/local_repo.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43938","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I would replace the condition with.\n\n```\nassert!(dot_hg_path.exists(), \".hg folder not found for the path given by -R argument: {:?}\", p);\n```","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"50","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/local_repo.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43937","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"You can add a later `.arg(dst)` to support non-utf8 paths instead of converting to a str here.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"54","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/lib.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43936","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"In rust we generally avoid brackets around `as` as it is very tightly binding.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"206","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43935","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Please use a better name for `sent`.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"199","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43934","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"You can use the entry api here.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"184","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43933","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"s\/rem\/path\/ or remaining_path.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"183","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43932","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Use an `else if`.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"175","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43931","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"You could do the following for a slight performance win and save a line.\n\n```\nif let Occupied(entry) = self.dmap.entry(relpath) {\n   ...\n}\n```","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"170","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43930","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I recommend not renaming this. It is confusing.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"5","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43929","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"This could have a better name.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"48","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43928","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"```\nlet mut grey = Set::new();\ngrey.extend(self.dmap.keys().map(|s| s.as_path()));\n```\n\nAlso I would pick a name like `undiscovered_paths` or something. `grey` is cryptic.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"146","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43927","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I would also put this filter above. But more importantly all `_is_bad()` does is check for file types. So it seems like the former filter is redundant with this one.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"169","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43926","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I would move this filter beside the filter in the loop.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"167","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43925","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I would just call this `path` or `pathbuf`.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"162","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43924","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Please explain why you are ignoring the error condition.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"161","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43923","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"This is probably worth a helper function.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"155","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43922","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I would prefer doing the filter before the loop and storing it in a variable.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"152","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43921","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"s\/mtc\/matcher\/","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"141","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43920","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Don't use `_` prefix for privates. Rely on rust viability. \n\nAlso `is_bad` isn't very informative.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"130","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43919","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Is ignoring duplicate entries desired? It might be worth a comment explaining why.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"125","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43918","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"This should Probably return a `Result<Self>` and pass the error to the caller.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"87","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43917","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"1. Does this function need to be public? It seems internal to the constructor.\n1. If it doesn't need to be I would prefer it return the Map so that you don't have a partial-constructed DirState.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"108","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43916","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I would skip this check and rely on `p.metadata()`. Just switch `.unwrap()` to `.expect()` with a nicer message. This also handles race conditions more nicely.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"90","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/dirstate.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43915","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Is this used yet? It probably also needs some documentation because I don't really understand the fields (but I do have little domain knowledge).","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"49","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/config.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43914","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"If you are just going to convert to String I would recommend taking a String argument.\n\nAlso prefer `.to_owned()` over `.to_string()`.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"78","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/config.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43913","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Just put `msg: content` in the struct construction.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"33","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/changelog.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43912","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"If you aren't using the value I would prefer `truncate(NodeId::hex_len())`","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"31","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/changelog.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43911","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Passing a message as a third argument is really useful.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"24","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/changelog.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43910","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Let rust do the overflow checking.\n\n```\nacc = acc.checked_mul(85)\n    .ok_or_else(|| {\n        PyErr::new::<exc::ValueError, _>(\n            py,\n            format!(\"bad base85 character at position {}\", i))\n    })?;","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"152","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgbase85\/src\/base85.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43909","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"This is probably worth a comment that this is safe because D85DEC is required to be initialized before this function is called.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"91","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgbase85\/src\/base85.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43908","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"```while !ptext.is_empty()```","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"52","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgbase85\/src\/base85.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43907","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"It might be best to use a [[ https:\/\/doc.rust-lang.org\/stable\/std\/io\/struct.Cursor.html | `std::io::Cursor` ]] and let it drack `dst_off` for your.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"47","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgbase85\/src\/base85.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43906","dateCreated":"1520530210","dateModified":"1520530210"},{"type":"inline","comment":"`ptext` isn't very descriptive. ","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"45","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgbase85\/src\/base85.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43905","dateCreated":"1520530209","dateModified":"1520530209"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Tracking len manually is a smell. Why not drop it and use `ptest.is_empty()`.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"63","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgbase85\/src\/base85.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43904","dateCreated":"1520530209","dateModified":"1520530209"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I would prefer the name `chunk` or even `accum` is a lot mode obvious to me than `acc`.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"54","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgbase85\/src\/base85.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43903","dateCreated":"1520530209","dateModified":"1520530209"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I suspect this type annotation isn't required.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"47","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgbase85\/src\/base85.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43902","dateCreated":"1520530209","dateModified":"1520530209"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Why the braces here?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"46","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgbase85\/src\/base85.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43901","dateCreated":"1520530209","dateModified":"1520530209"},{"type":"inline","comment":"IIUC pad is only ever checked `== 0`. Can it be made into a bool?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"23","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgbase85\/src\/base85.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43900","dateCreated":"1520530209","dateModified":"1520530209"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I would just combine these into one line as the name `ch` isn't adding much.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"58","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgbase85\/src\/base85.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43899","dateCreated":"1520530209","dateModified":"1520530209"},{"type":"inline","comment":"`&str` can only hold valid utf8 data? Does it make more sense to have `&[u8]` here for a list of bytes?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"23","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgbase85\/src\/base85.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43898","dateCreated":"1520530209","dateModified":"1520530209"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Would it be possible to separate the decode from the python objects. I'm thinking two helper functions.\n\n```\nfn b85_required_len(text: &str) -> usize\nfn b85_encode(text: &str, pad: i32, out: &mut [u8]) -> Result<()>\n```\n\n","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"23","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgbase85\/src\/base85.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43897","dateCreated":"1520530209","dateModified":"1520530209"},{"type":"inline","comment":"```\nfor i in &[24, 16, 8, 0]\n```","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"56","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgbase85\/src\/base85.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43896","dateCreated":"1520530209","dateModified":"1520530209"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I prefer something like this: https:\/\/play.rust-lang.org\/?gist=5ca18a5b95335600e911b8f9310ea5c7&version=stable\n\nI doubt lazy_static is too slow. Otherwise we can stay like this until const functions get implemented.\n\nEither way note:\n* I changed the type of B85CHARS to an array as opposed to an array ref.\n* The loop condition is much nicer.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"21","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgbase85\/src\/base85.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43895","dateCreated":"1520530209","dateModified":"1520530209"},{"type":"inline","comment":"If this is going to be reused I would move it into it's own crate. It seems like everything here could be boiled down to a single function call in main.","replyTo":"43863","isNewFile":"1","line":"1","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgbase85\/build.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"kevincox","id":"43894","dateCreated":"1520530209","dateModified":"1520530209"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I will try to finish the review later, but it might be quicker if you incorporate some of the changes first since a lot of them are repeated many times. Overall it looks good, there are a couple of things that i would highlight to make the code easier to read.\n\n* Prefer more descriptive variable names.\n* If you can, avoid \"pointer\" arithmetic. Cursors and slices are nice and have great convenience methods.\n* Group your flow control and filtering more.\n* Try to keep your types straight. In rust using the right types helps catch errors. So be aware of `char` vs `u8` vs `String` vs `Vec<char>` vs `Vec<u8>`.\n\nOn a higher level, all of these code appears to be treating file names as strings. This isn't really true and will disallow some valid file names. Maybe we should stick with bytes throughout. Of course this makes windows filepaths difficult because they are actually (utf16) strings.","author":"kevincox","id":"43893","dateCreated":"1520530209","dateModified":"1520530209"},{"type":"reject","author":"kevincox","id":"43892","dateCreated":"1520530209","dateModified":"1520530209"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Doesn't mononoke have code to read revlogs already?","author":"glandium","id":"43869","dateCreated":"1520495348","dateModified":"1520495348"},{"type":"inline","comment":"IIRC, core Mercurial keeps an open file handle on revlogs and ensures we don't run out of file handles by not keeping too many revlogs open at the same time. For scanning operations, not having to open and close the file handles all the time will make a difference for performance. Also, core Mercurial loads the entirety of the `.i` file into memory. That's a scaling problem for large revlogs. But it does make performance of index lookups really fast.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"279","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/revlog_v1.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"indygreg","id":"43867","dateCreated":"1520494272","dateModified":"1520494272"},{"type":"inline","comment":"A thread pool to help with zlib decompression should go a long way here.\n\nProbably too early to think about this, but we'll likely eventually want a global thread pool for doing I\/O and CPU expensive tasks, such as reading chunks from a revlog and decompressing them.\n\nFWIW, we're going to radically alter the storage format in order to better support shallow clones. But that work hasn't started yet. I still think there is a benefit to implementing the revlog code in Rust though.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"290","lineLength":"3","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/revlog_v1.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"indygreg","id":"43866","dateCreated":"1520494272","dateModified":"1520494272"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I would not worry about supporting v0 or v2 at this time. v0 is only important for backwards compatibility with ancient repos. And v2 never got off the ground.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"95","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgstorage\/src\/config.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"indygreg","id":"43865","dateCreated":"1520494272","dateModified":"1520494272"},{"type":"inline","comment":"This is definitely nifty and an impressive achievement \\o\/\n\nThe `r-` commands for testing pure Rust code paths are an interesting idea!\n\nI think I'm OK with including support for this in `hgcli`. But I think the code should live in a separate file so it doesn't pollute `main()`. And it should be behind a Cargo feature flag so we maintain compatibility with `hg` as much as possible by default.\n\nAlso, Mercurial's command line parser is extremely wonky and has some questionable behavior. If the intent is to make `rhg` compatible with `hg`, we would need to preserve this horrible behavior. We'll likely have to write a custom argument parser because of how quirky Mercurial's argument parser is :(","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"233","lineLength":"28","path":"rust\/hgcli\/src\/main.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"indygreg","id":"43864","dateCreated":"1520494272","dateModified":"1520494272"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I see this file was copied. There's nothing wrong with that. But does this mean we will need a custom build.rs for each Rust package doing Python? If that's the case, then I would prefer to isolate all our rust-cpython code to a single package, if possible. I'm guessing that could be challenging due to crossing create boundaries. I'm sure there are placed where we don't want to expose symbols outside the crate.\n\nI'm curious how others feel about this.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"1","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgbase85\/build.rs","diffId":"6724","author":"indygreg","id":"43863","dateCreated":"1520494272","dateModified":"1520494272"},{"type":"comment","comment":"First of all - wow! Thanks for writing all this code. There's definitely a lot to work with. And work with it we will!\n\nThis is definitely too big to review as one commit. If you could do *any* work to split it up, it would be greatly appreciated. I'd focus on the pure Rust pieces first. Everything needed to open revlogs would be great!\n\nYou may find our custom Phabricator extensions (linked from https:\/\/www.mercurial-scm.org\/wiki\/Phabricator) useful for submitting series of commits to Phabricator.\n\nRegarding the performance, that's pretty good! The dirstate code is some of the most optimized code in Mercurial. There are some gnarly Python C hacks to make it fast. Some of those tricks involve using special system calls to walk directories to minimize the number of system calls. I'm not sure if the crate you imported has those optimizations. (I wouldn't be surprised either way.) I wouldn't worry too much about performance at this juncture. But I suspect we could make the Rust code another 50% faster with some tweaking. It would also be interesting to test on a larger repo, say https:\/\/hg.mozilla.org\/mozilla-unified. Also, I believe there are hooks in the dirstate code to use Watchman (fsmonitor). Those hooks are critical in order to achieve peak performance on large repositories.\n\nSince you seem to be proficient at writing lots of Rust code, if you are looking for another project, may I suggest porting `chg` to Rust? That code is in `contrib\/chg`. That might be the easiest component to actually ship in Rust since it is a standalone binary that doesn't link against Python. But we shouldn't get ahead of ourselves :)\n\nAnyway, it is late for me and I need to detach from my computer. I'm sure others will have things to say as well...","author":"indygreg","id":"43862","dateCreated":"1520494272","dateModified":"1520494272"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Hi all,\n\nBased on the discussion a few weeks ago, I come up with a solution for review and discussion. After reading the Oxidation plan, the first thought is to bypass python engine and current plugin system IFF on request. If user (maybe background checker of IDE) request r-* subcommands, then hg gives rust implementations instead of python's. So I try to make hg r-status as fast as possible. The submitted version has comparable performance (as an example of the performance, not evidence, on my MacBook, in hg's own repo, hg r-status 150ms, and hg status 220ms). I am using CodeXL to profile the performance, and plan to use Future.rs to make the loading parallel and maybe 30ms faster.\n\nThe implementation originates from hg python implementation, because the python version is really fast. I tried to split into small changes, however, I eventually to combine all hgstorage module as one commit.\n\nThank you for your comments!","author":"Ivzhh","id":"43861","dateCreated":"1520491361","dateModified":"1520491361"},{"type":"comment","comment":"  - merge with stable\n  - translate base85.c into rust code\n  - move hgbase85 into independent module\n  - add hgstorage crate\n  - hg status implementation in rust\n","author":"Ivzhh","id":"43856","dateCreated":"1520490633","dateModified":"1520490633"},{"type":"update","diffId":"6724","author":"Ivzhh","id":"43855","dateCreated":"1520490633","dateModified":"1520490633"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Thank you @indygreg!\n\nThe OxidationPlan is my best reference when I started to make a move, and this thread is even more helpful. I am really interested in exploring this ;-) In 2014 I was trying to change the hg backend storage to Postgres, a silly and failed experiment.\n\nAnyway, I will save everyone's time and stop talking. I will come back later with a more meaningful implementation.","author":"Ivzhh","id":"34977","dateCreated":"1518075333","dateModified":"1518075333"},{"type":"comment","comment":"To be honest, we're not yet sure what we'll decide for the Python -> Rust bridge. The problem is summarized in the `Rust <=> Python Interop` section on https:\/\/www.mercurial-scm.org\/wiki\/OxidationPlan.\n\nI suspect at some level we'll need a CPython extension for CPython for performance reasons (especially for high volume function calls). PyPy obviously uses CFFI. I think the ideal outcome is we can write Rust that exposes a C API and use CFFI natively on PyPy and something like `cbindgen` + `Milksnake` to auto-generate a CPython extension that acts as a wrapper around the C API exposed by Rust. I'm not sure if anyone has invented this exact wheel yet. If not, it's probably faster to use `rust-cpython`. Maybe several months from now we have enough Rust and maintaining `rust-cpython` is painful enough that we pursue the auto-generated CPython extension route.\n\nWhat I'm trying to say is you have a green field to explore! But at this juncture, perfect is the enemy of done. We'll be happy with any forward progress, even failed experiments.","author":"indygreg","id":"34976","dateCreated":"1518074550","dateModified":"1518074550"},{"type":"comment","comment":"As the author of this patch, actually I have the same concern. I started to translate base85 as baby steps to find a way of integrating rust and cpython, on my side, Today I modify setup.py, policy.py and makefile to run hg's test suit with the new base85. For myself, it is only proof of concept.\n\nMaybe I should take another way: translate more python modules into CFFI-style, and let CFFI call rust implementation. And gradually change more implementations of python modules with corresponding cffi-style, while keep the python interface the same. My own hope is the rust routines will be able to call each other and eventually run some __basic__ tasks without calling python part. And the rust still lazily provides info to python interface for extensions etc.\n\nI am exploring this way now, and hope the findings will be useful for community to make decision.\n\nThank you all for the comments!","author":"Ivzhh","id":"34975","dateCreated":"1518070365","dateModified":"1518070365"},{"type":"comment","comment":"What would be the advantage of taking this? Since we already have the C implementation, it's not likely to gain us any performance. On the other hand, it might make a good test case for integrating Rust and Python, finding the right API boundaries and experimenting with different approaches, precisely \/\/because\/\/ we already have a C implementation. @indygreg @durin42 what are your thoughts about it?\n\n","author":"krbullock","id":"34910","dateCreated":"1518062354","dateModified":"1518062354"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I agree with the splitting comments :) In fact there might already be a base85 crate which can be used: https:\/\/docs.rs\/zero85. Either way I'll hold off on the review, feel free to ping me when you are ready for me to take a look.","author":"kevincox","id":"34640","dateCreated":"1518001891","dateModified":"1518001891"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Thank you @indygreg for your detailed explanation!\n\nI understand the process now, and I will go back reading the developer's guide thoroughly again. I will try my best to provide a relatively clean stack of patches.\n\nThank you for you time!","author":"Ivzhh","id":"34561","dateCreated":"1517972031","dateModified":"1517972031"},{"type":"comment","comment":"We generally prefer that patches to Mercurial be small and do a single thing. This makes it easier to review and understand changes, since each change can be evaluated in isolation. If you submit changesets together using `hg phabsend`, they automatically show up as a \/\/stack\/\/ in Phabricator. And if changesets at the bottom of the stack are ready to land, we generally land those without waiting for the entire stack to land. This enables forward progress to be made and this is generally better for everyone than waiting until a series of commits is perfect before adding any of them.\n\nWhat that means is you should ideally split this work into smaller parts. For example:\n\n  # Add the pure Rust code\/crate\n  # Add the Python Rust code\/crate\n  # Build system \/ module policy changes\n\nI'm not sure of the order of things though. Since this is the first Rust extension, it's not clear what needs to be implemented in what order. I'm fine looking at a large commit if things are too tightly coupled to separate. But you should strive to make smaller commits.\n\n","author":"indygreg","id":"34557","dateCreated":"1517970792","dateModified":"1517970792"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Sure, thank you for the comments! I can definitely prepare makefile and setup.py to make the building process work with rust part. I am planning to change the policy.py module to support and try to load rust modules and run all the tests. I will submit a new patch after finishing these two tasks.\n\nAfter reading wiki\/OxidationPlan again, I plan to change to cffi for better compatibility (pypy and others), and try to build algorithms in pure rust. Shall I wait till migrating to cffi based solution now and resubmit this patch with all three changes (building, testing, and cffi)?\n\nThank you!","author":"Ivzhh","id":"34556","dateCreated":"1517970271","dateModified":"1517970271"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Yes, we should definitely split things into multiple crates. Small, narrowly-focused crates does seem to be the Rust way, after all.\n\n`hgcli` should be for things specific to the Rust implementation of `hg`. I think this can also include the feature set of `chg` (once we've ported `chg` to Rust).\n\nI definitely support separating the \"pure Rust\" from the \"Python Rust\" via a crate boundary. It is generally useful to have Rust that isn't bound to Python because it will facilitate reuse outside of Python contexts. For example, someone could implement a Mercurial wire protocol server in pure Rust without needing to worry about Python. Of course, we're likely to encounter areas where we really want tight coupling in order to achieve optimal performance in Python. So we may have to design APIs on the pure Rust side to facilitate CPython use. I'm OK with that.\n\nAs for how many crates to have, I don't have super strong opinions. I could see us putting every little component\/subsystem in its own crate. I could also see us putting everything in one large crate. I don't think it is worth deciding at this early juncture. API design and ability to be reused outside its originally intended purpose is the important property to strive for. I think that has more to do with how the code is authored rather than which crates things are in.\n\nA missing piece of this patch is the build system and module loader integration. We have a \/\/module policy\/\/ that dictates which implementation of a Python module we use. We probably want to introduce a `rust` policy that uses Rust-based modules where available and falls back to the `cext` modules\/policy if a Rust module isn't available. We also need to figure out how to integrate Rust into `setup.py`. But I think the build system bit can be deferred until we're actually ready to ship Rust, which is still a bit of ways off. I'm happy for the workflow to be \/\/run cargo in order to load Rust modules\/\/ for the time being. But if you can implement `Makefile` and\/or `setup.py` integration to build these Rust extensions, that would be awesome.","author":"indygreg","id":"34484","dateCreated":"1517947275","dateModified":"1517947275"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I am open to the three-crates plan. Oirginally I have hgcli and hgext separately, and I was planning to use CFFI mode. I am a pypy user too, so I will be willing to provide a python C API free crate for pypy and others.","author":"Ivzhh","id":"34443","dateCreated":"1517928889","dateModified":"1517944524"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I think I'd like to separate things a bit more and have a Python-free module, and then a glue module that we can use to call into the pure Rust. Part of the reason is that in my perfect world we won't use the cpython crate for speedups so they can be used from pypy as well. Separating them at least makes it easier to have an extern \"C\" version of the method that can be used from cffi instead of only through the CPython API.\n\n(Not sure what opinions others have. It's likely that I'll attempt this approach in the near future as part of a continued attempt to speed up `hg diff`.)","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"22","lineLength":"0","path":"rust\/hgcli\/src\/hgext\/base85.rs","diffId":"5238","author":"durin42","id":"34390","dateCreated":"1517913293","dateModified":"1517913293"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I'd be curious to see what @indygreg has to say about this, maybe wait on his input before doing any work in response to my feedback?\n\nI do wonder if we should have at least three crates:\n\n # hgcli\n # libmercurial\n # hgcext\n\nThe first one would be the command-line entry point, the last could use the cpython API, and libmercurial would be \"pure rust\" and open the door to eventually having a libhg or something that exports C functions and would be suitable for cffi and linking into other binaries?","author":"durin42","id":"34389","dateCreated":"1517913293","dateModified":"1517913293"},{"type":"update","diffId":"5238","author":"Ivzhh","id":"34367","dateCreated":"1517869861","dateModified":"1517869861"}],"dateCreated":"1517869861","dateModified":"1579887188","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"2623","callsign":"HG","title":"dispatch: adding config items for overriding flag defaults","author":"rdamazio","summary":"This introduces the new defaults format \"commandname.default.optionname\" which\ndirectly overrides the default of the option, instead of prepending the\ncommand-line option. This is meant to replace the [defaults] section which is\nalready deprecated in a manner that's easier and safer to use than creating\naliases.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"96","dependsOn":["2622"],"reviewers":["yuja","baymax"],"ccs":["dploch","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117697","dateCreated":"1579887186","dateModified":"1579887186"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117696","dateCreated":"1579887186","dateModified":"1579887186"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I thought callables were meant to be used to generate the default default, not with overridden values?","replyTo":"43409","isNewFile":"1","line":"625","lineLength":"1","path":"mercurial\/dispatch.py","diffId":"6609","author":"rdamazio","id":"47743","dateCreated":"1522132208","dateModified":"1522132208"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Nobody should use the same *instance* on multiple flags. Even with the current flags, if you use e.g. the same list on many, that'll cause problems with listopt.\n","replyTo":"43410","isNewFile":"1","line":"639","lineLength":"1","path":"mercurial\/dispatch.py","diffId":"6609","author":"rdamazio","id":"47742","dateCreated":"1522132208","dateModified":"1522132208"},{"type":"inline","comment":"This makes me nervous.  What if someone re-uses a customopt instance in multiple commands?  i.e.:\n\nDATE_FLAG = mypkg.dateopt()\n...\n('b', 'before', DATE_FLAG, '')\n('a', 'after', 'DATE_FLAG', '')\n\nNow, setting commands.defaults.before=2018-03-05 also silently changes the default for 'after'.  I suspect we need to introduce a wrapper class like what I suggest on lines 625-625, that delegates and leaves the original default unchanged.  And either way, we should probably clarify in the docs on customopts what expected use of the class is (i.e., should we just forbid reuse, is 'oldstate' safe to mutate, etc.)","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"639","lineLength":"1","path":"mercurial\/dispatch.py","diffId":"6609","author":"dploch","id":"43410","dateCreated":"1520292544","dateModified":"1520292544"},{"type":"inline","comment":"This doesn't handle callables properly.  I wonder if the something like the following would work instead:\n\noldopt = fancyopts._defaultopt(olddefault)\nnewdefault = old.opt.newstate(olddefault, ui.config(\"commands\", cfgitem)\nc[idx] = (opt[0], opt[1], fancyopts._withnewdefault(oldopt, newdefault), opt[3])\n\nWhere '_withnewdefault' is a wrapper customopt that just changes the default.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"625","lineLength":"1","path":"mercurial\/dispatch.py","diffId":"6609","author":"dploch","id":"43409","dateCreated":"1520292544","dateModified":"1520292544"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I think rdamazio's response is correct.  The type information for an opt exists only in the 'defaultvalue' slot in the tuple, so it needs to be extracted from there before reading the config.  I don't have a strong opinion as to where this code should go - 'ui' does seem marginally more appropriate than 'fancyopts', since it keeps 'fancyopts' low-level and not depending on 'ui'.","replyTo":"42582","isNewFile":"1","line":"624","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/dispatch.py","diffId":"6523","author":"dploch","id":"43408","dateCreated":"1520292544","dateModified":"1520292544"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Ah, makes sense. See if this addresses that case satisfactorily - it still has the caveat of not being able to \"reset\" container types, but that's true of the command line as well (if you have a list flag with a non-empty default, there's no way to remove that default item).","replyTo":"42770","isNewFile":"1","line":"624","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/dispatch.py","diffId":"6523","author":"rdamazio","id":"43071","dateCreated":"1520195950","dateModified":"1520195950"},{"type":"update","diffId":"6609","author":"rdamazio","id":"43064","dateCreated":"1520195818","dateModified":"1520195818"},{"type":"inline","comment":"IIUC, an extension author may implement its own customopt subclasses, and\nput them into the command table, so we can't make ui.configtyped to\nsupport all of them.","replyTo":"42686","isNewFile":"1","line":"624","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/dispatch.py","diffId":"6523","author":"yuja","id":"42770","dateCreated":"1520183736","dateModified":"1520183736"},{"type":"inline","comment":"You're right, I had the plain logic inverted in my head. Removed.","replyTo":"42581","isNewFile":"1","line":"390","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/ui.py","diffId":"6523","author":"rdamazio","id":"42687","dateCreated":"1520181261","dateModified":"1520181261"},{"type":"inline","comment":"The issue is that customopt (and all its children) assume the value type is already the correct one, and thus do not perform any conversion. Since we're parsing values from the config file, the conversion is desired to ensure they don't all end up as text - the config{bool,int,etc} methods called by configtyped perform the proper conversion. In most cases (all commands that declare default values) no conversio is needed since those already have the correct type.\n","replyTo":"42582","isNewFile":"1","line":"624","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/dispatch.py","diffId":"6523","author":"rdamazio","id":"42686","dateCreated":"1520181261","dateModified":"1520181261"},{"type":"update","diffId":"6548","author":"rdamazio","id":"42684","dateCreated":"1520181250","dateModified":"1520181250"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Maybe this type conversion can be a `fancyopt.customopt` method since we've\nrefactored the default handling by D2090?\n\n```\n# no idea if _defaultopt() should be made public or the whole commands.default handling\n# should be moved to fancyopts\nx = fancyopts._defaultopt(olddefault)\nnewdefault = x.configdefault(ui, cmd, optname, ...)\n```\n\n@dploch, any suggestions?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"624","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/dispatch.py","diffId":"6523","author":"yuja","id":"42582","dateCreated":"1520173297","dateModified":"1520173297"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Perhaps this is noop since `[commands]` is removed at all if `ui.plain()` returns True.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"390","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/ui.py","diffId":"6523","author":"yuja","id":"42581","dateCreated":"1520173297","dateModified":"1520173297"},{"type":"reject","author":"yuja","id":"42578","dateCreated":"1520173297","dateModified":"1520173297"},{"type":"comment","comment":"FYI this is a change I had previously sent to the list as 60b3222e01f96f91ece7eda9681a89bf3bb930a6, and Yuya reviewed . I just had never followed up on it.","author":"rdamazio","id":"42436","dateCreated":"1520122245","dateModified":"1520122245"},{"type":"update","diffId":"6523","author":"rdamazio","id":"42435","dateCreated":"1520121514","dateModified":"1520121514"},{"type":"update","diffId":"6521","author":"rdamazio","id":"42421","dateCreated":"1520121282","dateModified":"1520121282"}],"dateCreated":"1520121282","dateModified":"1579887186","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"3663","callsign":"HG","title":"graft: add test showing --continue not preserving --edit passed earlier","author":"pulkit","summary":"Right now, if you run `hg graft --edit`, face some conflicts, resolve them and\nthen run `hg graft --continue`, you will see graft no longer pops up for the\neditor and you hate mercurial for not remembering arguments you passed earlier.\n\nUpcoming patch will fix this buggy behavior and this test will help us in\nrealizing those changes.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"41","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117694","dateCreated":"1579887185","dateModified":"1579887185"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117693","dateCreated":"1579887185","dateModified":"1579887185"},{"type":"update","diffId":"8908","author":"pulkit","id":"57562","dateCreated":"1527287120","dateModified":"1527287120"}],"dateCreated":"1527287120","dateModified":"1579887185","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"3187","callsign":"HG","title":"phase: add dry-run functionality","author":"khanchi97","summary":"Added the logic to find those csets whose phase will be changed\n(while running without --dry-run). And show the list of those csets.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"173","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["pulkit","baymax"],"ccs":["av6","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117691","dateCreated":"1579887184","dateModified":"1579887184"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117690","dateCreated":"1579887184","dateModified":"1579887184"},{"type":"update","diffId":"8962","author":"khanchi97","id":"57894","dateCreated":"1528037274","dateModified":"1528037274"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Nice work! I like where how you simplified things from previous version.\n\nIf you look at the patch, this seems to do multiple things at once which are:\n\n  * adding dry-run argument to advanceboundary and retractboundary functions\n  * adding a new --dry-run flag to hg phase\n\nLet's break things up in individual patches so that we can improve more on individual pieces. Can you split this into a separate patch for adding dryrun argument to each function, i.e. one patch for adcanceboundary, one for retractboundary, and then one last patch which adds the new flag? That will be very much helpful in reviewing this work and also making incremental changes and moving forward step by step.","author":"pulkit","id":"57621","dateCreated":"1527622549","dateModified":"1527622549"},{"type":"comment","comment":"@pulkit Now I moved the logic for finding revs (those phase will change)  to advanceboundry and retractboundry function and for now it shows all nodes. I am working to show range instead. Take a look at this when you are free :)","author":"khanchi97","id":"57619","dateCreated":"1527584154","dateModified":"1527584154"},{"type":"update","diffId":"8896","author":"khanchi97","id":"57476","dateCreated":"1527280427","dateModified":"1527280427"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D3187#57349, @khanchi97 wrote:\n> okay, but I have some queries like\n> 1. How about showing revision no. instead of cset id?\n\nI think we should show cset ids. If you want to with rev numbers, go with that. This should not be a blocker to get the initial patch in.\n> 2. And in this https:\/\/pastebin.com\/raw\/kWcr9xVK example if I change revision 2 phase to --secret then how it should print the range, I mean now we have branches in this range?\n> \n> Can we show that range like this:\n> \n> 0316ce92851d : : b385d13d5ed4  draft  ->  secret\n> 0316ce92851d : : 4ccc844d5454   draft  -> secret\n\nThere are two ways you can show the range in this case:\n\n1) 0316ce92851d::b385d13d5ed4 and f19b7f89f44e::4ccc844d5454\n2) 0316ce92851d::4ccc844d5454 and b385d13d5ed4\n\nLook into `hg help revsets` to understand what `::` means.","author":"pulkit","id":"57419","dateCreated":"1527196739","dateModified":"1527196739"},{"type":"comment","comment":"okay, but I have some queries like\n1. How about showing revision no. instead of cset id?\n2. And in this https:\/\/pastebin.com\/raw\/kWcr9xVK example if I change revision 2 phase to --secret then how it should print the range, I mean now we have branches in this range?\n\nCan we show that range like this:\n\n0316ce92851d : : b385d13d5ed4  draft  ->  secret\n0316ce92851d : : 4ccc844d5454   draft  -> secret","author":"khanchi97","id":"57349","dateCreated":"1527158527","dateModified":"1527158527"},{"type":"inline","comment":"This is not very much helpful. In such cases, how about showing the range of changesets, something like:\n```f7b1eb17ad24::925d80f479bb public -> draft\nb385d13d5ed4::fdc0253c25cf secret -> draft``` ","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"990","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-phases.t","diffId":"7877","author":"pulkit","id":"57180","dateCreated":"1526844970","dateModified":"1526844970"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Since all the logic is copy-pasted from phases.advanceboundary and phases.retractboundary, why not we just pass the `--dry-run` option there and get the count from those functions only.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"3898","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/commands.py","diffId":"7877","author":"pulkit","id":"57179","dateCreated":"1526844970","dateModified":"1526844970"},{"type":"comment","comment":"@pulkit Can you please review it?","author":"khanchi97","id":"51519","dateCreated":"1523353338","dateModified":"1523353338"},{"type":"update","diffId":"7877","author":"khanchi97","id":"51174","dateCreated":"1523185235","dateModified":"1523185235"},{"type":"inline","comment":"`\"cannot use --dry-run without target phase\"`","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"3872","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/commands.py","diffId":"7874","author":"av6","id":"51173","dateCreated":"1523167056","dateModified":"1523167056"},{"type":"update","diffId":"7874","author":"khanchi97","id":"51159","dateCreated":"1523101349","dateModified":"1523101349"},{"type":"update","diffId":"7873","author":"khanchi97","id":"51153","dateCreated":"1523100805","dateModified":"1523100805"}],"dateCreated":"1523100805","dateModified":"1579887184","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"3664","callsign":"HG","title":"graft: reuse the --edit value passed initially in `hg graft --continue` (BC)","author":"pulkit","summary":"This patch starts storing the value of --edit flag passed by the user initially\nwhen they runs `hg graft --edit`. We can now read the value from graftstate in\ncase of `--continue` and respect the value which user passed earlier.\n\nThe tests changes demonstrate the fix.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"28","dependsOn":["3663"],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["yuja","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117688","dateCreated":"1579887182","dateModified":"1579887182"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117687","dateCreated":"1579887182","dateModified":"1579887182"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Queued the first two, thanks.\n\n>   This patch starts storing the value of --edit flag passed by the user initially\n>   when they runs `hg graft --edit`. We can now read the value from graftstate in\n>   case of `--continue` and respect the value which user passed earlier.\n\nI'm -0.5 on this since --edit is an option to change the interactive behavior,\nand I think we don't preserve such options across interrupted sessions.","author":"yuja","id":"58065","dateCreated":"1528200002","dateModified":"1528200002"},{"type":"update","diffId":"8909","author":"pulkit","id":"57568","dateCreated":"1527287139","dateModified":"1527287139"}],"dateCreated":"1527287139","dateModified":"1579887182","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"2945","callsign":"HG","title":"state: add a magicheader to each state file","author":"pulkit","summary":"This patch adds a magic header to each state file written using CBOR format so\nthat we can distinguish between old state files and new one even if old state\nfiles get successfully parsed by cbor.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"1","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["jeffpc","yuja","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117685","dateCreated":"1579887181","dateModified":"1579887181"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117684","dateCreated":"1579887181","dateModified":"1579887181"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D2945#58586, @pulkit wrote:\n> There is a suggestion from @jeffpc to have a plain text header in statefiles like `HGStateFile` so that user can grep for them or look into files and know that they are state files. How does that sound?\n> (@jeffpc I am not sure I explained this correctly, it will be great if you can chime in.)\n\nI don't really care about the actual string value, I just think it is a good storage design practice to have every on-disk structure contain a magic value of some sort.  (Beware, I have a storage background and therefore opinions about these things... ;) )  This makes it easier to do all sort of data recovery should the need arise.  E.g.,\n\n  - if you know that a random file (e.g., from lost+found) is a hg state file, you can ignore\/delete it and just reclone your repos\n  - hg can detect some corruption better, and depending on the state file regenerate it or error out\n  - hg developers can more easily sort out what's what when looking at buffers\/files\/etc.\n  - as an added bonus, the magic can be used for format versioning\n\n\nFWIW, the three major things that I consider essential to good on-disk structures:\n\n  # magic numbers - see above\n  # checksums - possibly two checksums: one for the header and one for the payload\n  # back-pointers - see below\n\nBack-pointers allow you to tie the file\/buffer into the bigger context - be it which state file it is, or which repository it belongs to.  In this case a state file's back-pointer could be something like the repo-id + state-file-name stored in the state file's header.  (I realize that there is no repo-id, but in general some approximation of it tends to be better than nothing.)  This should make it painfully obvious what data one is dealing with and how to parse\/interpret it just by looking at the byte-stream without any other context.\n\n\nBy the way, I think that the magic should *not* be part of the CBOR payload but rather be at a fixed location in the file.  The easier it is to find, the easier it is to detect issues (and to avoid trying to decode bad\/malicious input).","author":"jeffpc","id":"58725","dateCreated":"1529024379","dateModified":"1529024509"},{"type":"comment","comment":"There is a suggestion from @jeffpc to have a plain text header in statefiles like `HGStateFile` so that user can grep for them or look into files and know that they are state files. How does that sound?\n(@jeffpc I am not sure I explained this correctly, it will be great if you can chime in.)","author":"pulkit","id":"58587","dateCreated":"1529007034","dateModified":"1529007034"},{"type":"comment","comment":"> There are some old state files, which don't have a version header on top\n> of them like graftstate. I need suggestion on how to handle them.\n\nIn that case, we would have to either do some heuristic (like histedit), or maintain\nold\/new state files (like mergestate.) Perhaps graft can do the latter?","author":"yuja","id":"47899","dateCreated":"1522244380","dateModified":"1522244380"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D2945#47831, @yuja wrote:\n> I think the magic has to vary depending on the current state file format.\n> The state file must be backward\/forward compatible with the older\/newer formats.\n> \n> If the current magic is `2\\n` (and is parsed as `int(f.readline())`) for example, the\n> CBOR preamble would have to be `3\\n`. Otherwise, old hg client cant determine\n> whether the state file is corrupted or written by newer client.\n\nThere are some old state files, which don't have a version header on top of them like graftstate. I need suggestion on how to handle them.\n","author":"pulkit","id":"47892","dateCreated":"1522235138","dateModified":"1522235138"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I think the magic has to vary depending on the current state file format.\nThe state file must be backward\/forward compatible with the older\/newer formats.\n\nIf the current magic is `2\\n` (and is parsed as `int(f.readline())`) for example, the\nCBOR preamble would have to be `3\\n`. Otherwise, old hg client cant determine\nwhether the state file is corrupted or written by newer client.\n\nFWIW, last time I reviewed `simplekeyvaluefile`, I insisted that a parser should\ntake a file stream instead of a filename, so the caller can handle compatibility thingy.\n\n```\nwith open(\"statefile\", \"rb\") as fp:\n    try:\n        version = int(fp.readline())\n    except ValueError:\n        raise some nicer exception\n    if version == 2:\n        return readold(fp)\n    elif version == 3:\n        return readcbor(fp)\n```","author":"yuja","id":"47832","dateCreated":"1522155487","dateModified":"1522155487"},{"type":"update","diffId":"7299","author":"pulkit","id":"47624","dateCreated":"1522084159","dateModified":"1522084159"}],"dateCreated":"1522084159","dateModified":"1579887181","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"3650","callsign":"HG","title":"serve: add an option to open in the default browser","author":"nspanti-logilab","summary":"It is inspired by a similar functionality in pydoc. `-g`\/`--graphical` may not be adequate, the only other idea that I have is `-w`\/`--window`.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"42","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["yuja","pulkit","av6","durin42","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117682","dateCreated":"1579887179","dateModified":"1579887179"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117681","dateCreated":"1579887179","dateModified":"1579887179"},{"type":"comment","comment":"(Resend because I forgot to remove the \"someone wrote:\" line again, sorry.)\n\n>   For laziness,  this patch could be also useful. It is also better for text shell beginners, because they may not know that they can combine commands like that (even if it is basic).\n\nFor laziness, we can add it to `[alias]`. I'm not a fan of adding lots of\none-off options since that's the source of man page bloat.\n\nHow about document the xdg-open example in `hg help serve -v`?","author":"yuja","id":"58867","dateCreated":"1529155285","dateModified":"1529155285"},{"type":"comment","comment":"For laziness,  this patch could be also useful. It is also better for text shell beginners, because they may not know that they can combine commands like that (even if it is basic). Moreover, you can still use `hg serve` in foreground or use it in background and give the result of `--print-url` to a non web browser application (but I imagine that there is a way to duplicate stdout to multiple programs). These are the advantages of this patch that I see over `--print-url` of D3649. It is better for convenience and require less knowledge for the user, but it is not a need. D3649 was precisely suggested to me because it can fulfill the functionality of the current patch and is more versatile.","author":"nspanti-logilab","id":"58735","dateCreated":"1529052032","dateModified":"1529052032"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Do we need this patch any more since D3649 has landed and we can do `xdg-open \"$(hg serve --print-url)\"`?","author":"pulkit","id":"58567","dateCreated":"1529005653","dateModified":"1529005653"},{"type":"comment","comment":"D3649 mentions `xdg-open \"$(hg serve --print-url)\"`, which shows that --print-url can nearly replace --graphical and is more versatile.","author":"av6","id":"57842","dateCreated":"1527944680","dateModified":"1527944680"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I don't love the flag name, and am -0 on the feature in general. All terminal emulators I've used in the last 10 years have URL detection logic and make clicking the link trivial...","author":"durin42","id":"57770","dateCreated":"1527794132","dateModified":"1527794132"},{"type":"update","diffId":"8881","author":"nspanti-logilab","id":"57359","dateCreated":"1527168904","dateModified":"1527168904"}],"dateCreated":"1527168904","dateModified":"1579887180","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"3672","callsign":"HG","title":"retractboundary: add dryrun parameter","author":"khanchi97","summary":"Added the logic to find those csets whose phase will be changed\nwithout --dry-run and return those csets.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"66","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["yuja","pulkit","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117679","dateCreated":"1579887178","dateModified":"1579887178"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117678","dateCreated":"1579887178","dateModified":"1579887178"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I think affected can be used here. Maybe @yuja might know better.\n\n@yuja we want to return a set of revs whose phase is changed by this function. Does affected looks like the correct set to you?","replyTo":"57830","isNewFile":"1","line":"417","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/phases.py","diffId":"8948","author":"pulkit","id":"61254","dateCreated":"1531344290","dateModified":"1531344290"},{"type":"update","diffId":"8960","author":"khanchi97","id":"57892","dateCreated":"1528034158","dateModified":"1528034158"},{"type":"update","diffId":"8959","author":"khanchi97","id":"57891","dateCreated":"1528033881","dateModified":"1528033881"},{"type":"inline","comment":"okay, will do this for 'advanceboundry' too","replyTo":"57825","isNewFile":"1","line":"511","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/phases.py","diffId":"8948","author":"khanchi97","id":"57833","dateCreated":"1527857439","dateModified":"1527857439"},{"type":"inline","comment":"yeah, I got it.","replyTo":"57824","isNewFile":"1","line":"430","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/phases.py","diffId":"8948","author":"khanchi97","id":"57832","dateCreated":"1527857439","dateModified":"1527857439"},{"type":"inline","comment":"okay","replyTo":"57823","isNewFile":"1","line":"395","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/phases.py","diffId":"8948","author":"khanchi97","id":"57831","dateCreated":"1527857439","dateModified":"1527857439"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Because I think this affected set is calculated after performing actions, when phases are changed. And calculating affected using new phaseroots. Am I missing something here?","replyTo":"57822","isNewFile":"1","line":"417","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/phases.py","diffId":"8948","author":"khanchi97","id":"57830","dateCreated":"1527857439","dateModified":"1527857439"},{"type":"inline","comment":"This should better be:\n\n`If dryrun is True, no actions will be performed\n\nreturns a set of revs whose phase is changed or should be changed`","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"511","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/phases.py","diffId":"8948","author":"pulkit","id":"57825","dateCreated":"1527845546","dateModified":"1527845546"},{"type":"inline","comment":"(Not sure which line I should put this comment on)\n\nJust like D3671, here also, the function should return the correct set of changes whose phase have been changed irrespective of the dryrun value passed.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"430","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/phases.py","diffId":"8948","author":"pulkit","id":"57824","dateCreated":"1527845546","dateModified":"1527845546"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Add documentation about dry-run and the return value.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"395","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/phases.py","diffId":"8948","author":"pulkit","id":"57823","dateCreated":"1527845546","dateModified":"1527845546"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Why are we not using this affected set here to find the changesets whose phase is changed?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"417","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/phases.py","diffId":"8948","author":"pulkit","id":"57822","dateCreated":"1527845546","dateModified":"1527845546"},{"type":"update","diffId":"8948","author":"khanchi97","id":"57812","dateCreated":"1527836390","dateModified":"1527836390"},{"type":"update","diffId":"8929","author":"khanchi97","id":"57663","dateCreated":"1527675912","dateModified":"1527675912"}],"dateCreated":"1527675912","dateModified":"1579887179","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"3830","callsign":"HG","title":"rebase: suppress transaction warns during dry-run","author":"khanchi97","summary":"Suppressed warnings thrown while aborting a transaction during\ndryrun because these warnings does not sound safe to user.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"23","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax","martinvonz"],"ccs":["mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117675","dateCreated":"1579887177","dateModified":"1579887177"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117674","dateCreated":"1579887177","dateModified":"1579887177"},{"type":"update","diffId":"9593","author":"khanchi97","id":"61465","dateCreated":"1531549446","dateModified":"1531549446"},{"type":"update","diffId":"9501","author":"khanchi97","id":"60911","dateCreated":"1531233875","dateModified":"1531233875"},{"type":"update","diffId":"9384","author":"khanchi97","id":"60399","dateCreated":"1530438740","dateModified":"1530438740"},{"type":"update","diffId":"9359","author":"khanchi97","id":"60261","dateCreated":"1530295767","dateModified":"1530295767"},{"type":"update","diffId":"9347","author":"khanchi97","id":"60219","dateCreated":"1530216657","dateModified":"1530216657"},{"type":"update","diffId":"9269","author":"khanchi97","id":"59837","dateCreated":"1529835539","dateModified":"1529835539"},{"type":"update","diffId":"9267","author":"khanchi97","id":"59827","dateCreated":"1529832650","dateModified":"1529832650"}],"dateCreated":"1529832650","dateModified":"1579887177","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"3946","callsign":"HG","title":"obsolete: resolved ValueError for var containing 2 ':' chars(issue-5783)","author":"abhyudaypratap","summary":"feature Note accepts ':' chars\nSo metadata of obsmarker consists of more then 1 ':' char,\nThe content of the variable 'data' in this function is:\n'date:1518013344.878793 -3600\\x00ef1:0\\x00note:6c95ca::a1e17f\\x00p1:ed7673f73387b36521da58a87f08e02e4a795ded\\x00user:Denis Laxalde <xxx@yyy.zz>'\n\nresulting in giving a error ValueError (too many values to unpack) because we are trying to store multiple values into two variables key and value\n\nResolving this error by splitting the variable 'l' from the first occurence of ':'\nkey, value = l.split(\"\", 1)","testPlan":"","lineCount":"2","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["yuja","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117672","dateCreated":"1579887176","dateModified":"1579887176"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117671","dateCreated":"1579887176","dateModified":"1579887176"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Looks good. Can you add a test?\n\nhttps:\/\/www.mercurial-scm.org\/wiki\/ContributingChanges#Coding_style_and_testing\n\nThe version 0 format can be enforced by `--config format.obsstore-version=0`.","author":"yuja","id":"61491","dateCreated":"1531661257","dateModified":"1531661257"},{"type":"update","diffId":"9596","author":"abhyudaypratap","id":"61478","dateCreated":"1531593829","dateModified":"1531593829"}],"dateCreated":"1531593829","dateModified":"1579887176","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"3986","callsign":"HG","title":"split: abort if there's an unfinished operation","author":"martinvonz","summary":"","testPlan":"","lineCount":"10","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["quark","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117669","dateCreated":"1579887175","dateModified":"1579887175"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117668","dateCreated":"1579887175","dateModified":"1579887175"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I think a most flexible solution is to not do the check if there is nothing to rebase.","author":"quark","id":"62080","dateCreated":"1533137720","dateModified":"1533137720"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Oh, I should have said that I agree with not queuing this patch now. We can discuss what we want to do and do it on the default branch later.","author":"martinvonz","id":"61992","dateCreated":"1533018979","dateModified":"1533018979"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D3986#61989, @quark wrote:\n> FB has users reporting they need to split commits in the middle of a histedit. So this might be too restrictive.\n\nTwo thoughts:\n\n1. We had talked at Google about having the \"edit\" action create split markers if the user created multiple commits. Do you think that would address the FB users' use case?\n\n2. It seems very dangerous to not have this check at least when not using obsmarkers and there are descendants of the current commit (split then rebases the descendants), so I'd like to keep the check in at least that case.\n","author":"martinvonz","id":"61991","dateCreated":"1533014407","dateModified":"1533014407"},{"type":"comment","comment":"FB has users reporting they need to split commits in the middle of a histedit. So this might be too restrictive.","author":"quark","id":"61990","dateCreated":"1533014171","dateModified":"1533014171"},{"type":"update","diffId":"9671","author":"martinvonz","id":"61978","dateCreated":"1532987112","dateModified":"1532987112"}],"dateCreated":"1532987112","dateModified":"1579887175","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"4053","callsign":"HG","title":"[RFC]hgweb: garbage collect on every request in hgweb_mod too","author":"pulkit","summary":"We recently updated to mercurial 4.6.2 on our servers and also increased number\nof requests to be made on server at one time. This made hgweb instance takes up\na lot of memory, sometime upto 50GB of memory when requests are made parallely.\n\nThis patch is motivated from\nhttps:\/\/www.mercurial-scm.org\/repo\/hg-committed\/rev\/ff2370a70fe8 which adds\ngc.collect() call for the server which serves multiple repositories.\n\nI tried profiling this fix, sometimes this shows less memory usage, sometimes\nmore, so I am not sure whether this is right and hence RFC tag.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"16","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["av6","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117666","dateCreated":"1579887174","dateModified":"1579887174"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117665","dateCreated":"1579887174","dateModified":"1579887174"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D4053#62855, @av6 wrote:\n> Are you sure you're not just using hgwebdir_mod? hgweb_mod is for cases when you don't use --web-conf flag, at least that seems to be the logic that `hgweb.createapp()` uses to pick one of the two modules.\n\nI checked and we are using hgwebdir_mod. When I was testing locally I was not using --web-conf flag, so maybe that's why I ran into `hgweb_mod`. The problem still exists though and we have limited the number of requests at once. Thanks!","author":"pulkit","id":"65973","dateCreated":"1534331436","dateModified":"1534331436"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Are you sure you're not just using hgwebdir_mod? hgweb_mod is for cases when you don't use --web-conf flag, at least that seems to be the logic that `hgweb.createapp()` uses to pick one of the two modules.","author":"av6","id":"62856","dateCreated":"1533231595","dateModified":"1533231595"},{"type":"update","diffId":"9792","author":"pulkit","id":"62851","dateCreated":"1533225478","dateModified":"1533225478"},{"type":"update","diffId":"9787","author":"pulkit","id":"62829","dateCreated":"1533219726","dateModified":"1533219726"}],"dateCreated":"1533219726","dateModified":"1579887174","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"4301","callsign":"HG","title":"tests: add a directory 'knownfailures' to check in known failures","author":"pulkit","summary":"There are some things which everyone of us stumble upon and found out that this\ndoes not work. Sometimes, we hg developers know that these things does not works\nbecause of experience. But this does not scale well when we have a new developer\nor maybe a user who wants to see what does not work and is interested in fixing\nthat.\n\nChecking in the tests about the things which don't work will help others to\nreproduce these and also helps in fixing because of functionalities\n.\/run-tests.py provides.\n\nIIRC we had this thought in one of the previous sprints also to checkin some of\nthe known failures.\n\nI am starting with checking in a basic test failure. But I plan to check in\nmore narrow related failures which we have found.\n\nUnable to find easily what exactly broken with merges and narrow made me to\nimplement this idea so that we won't have similar problem in future.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"4","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["durin42","baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117660","dateCreated":"1579887171","dateModified":"1579887171"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117659","dateCreated":"1579887171","dateModified":"1579887171"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I also think that the 'knowfailures' can serve as a good place for new contributors.\nI don't want to check-in all the failures and leave them unfixed. It's like I don't know which one I will be able to fix and I have a reproduction which can help others.","author":"pulkit","id":"66188","dateCreated":"1534432054","dateModified":"1534432054"},{"type":"update","diffId":"10391","author":"pulkit","id":"66182","dateCreated":"1534431586","dateModified":"1534431586"}],"dateCreated":"1534431586","dateModified":"1579887172","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"4409","callsign":"HG","title":"rebase: skip *all* obsolete revisions, just warn about divergence","author":"martinvonz","summary":"We already skip obsolete revisions in some case: if there is no\nsuccessor, or when the successor is in the rebase set or in the\ndestination, I think. However, we instead error out if the successor\nis elsewhere (e.g. a child or a sibling of the destination), because\nit would cause divergence. The previous commit fixed one specific case\nof this.\n\nConsider this history (based on a test case updated by this patch):\n\n  o  D\n  |\n  | o  B'\n  |\/\n  | o  C\n  | |\n  | x  B\n  |\/\n  o A\n\nIf the user now runs `hg rebase -s B -d D` we would error out and tell\nthem that it would cause divergence from B. This patch makes it so we\ninstead ignore B and C (and tell the user that we're doing that\nbecause it would cause divergence). I think this simpler model will be\neasier for users to understand (I had also thought that all obsolete\ncommits and their descendants were skipped until we got reports from\nusers that that wasn't the case).\n\nNote that we still skip just the obsolete (not its descendants) if\nit's a prune or if the successor is in the destination.\n\nThis should also let us simplify the source quite a bit. I'll do that\nin later commits after I've heard people's thoughts on this one.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"40","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["lothiraldan","yuja","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117657","dateCreated":"1579887170","dateModified":"1579887170"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117656","dateCreated":"1579887170","dateModified":"1579887170"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Changing the behavior of `--src` to ignore obsolete and orphan unrelated to the destination seems like a good idea.\n\nHowever, this change seems to also affect `--rev`. The `--rev` allow for a precise selection of what the user wants to see rebased and it feels like we should stick to the user wishes here. Dropping explicitly selected revisions feels wrong and will make some use cases harder to perform.","author":"lothiraldan","id":"67654","dateCreated":"1535551219","dateModified":"1535551219"},{"type":"comment","comment":"> @@ -1289,18 +1286,16 @@\n>    o  0:b173517d0057 a\n>    \n>    $ hg rebase -d 0 -r 2\n> -  rebasing 2:a82ac2b38757 \"c\" (c)\n> +  note: not rebasing 2:a82ac2b38757 \"c\" (c) and its descendants as this would cause divergence\n\nLooks like the fix for issue5782 regressed.\n\nhttps:\/\/bz.mercurial-scm.org\/show_bug.cgi?id=5782","author":"yuja","id":"67642","dateCreated":"1535547342","dateModified":"1535547342"},{"type":"update","diffId":"10616","author":"martinvonz","id":"67528","dateCreated":"1535441604","dateModified":"1535441604"}],"dateCreated":"1535441604","dateModified":"1579887170","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"4479","callsign":"HG","title":"[RFC] obsolete: add mechanism to filter obsstore","author":"lothiraldan","summary":"This patch is not ready to land and only sent for discussion.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"24","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["pulkit","martinvonz","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117654","dateCreated":"1579887168","dateModified":"1579887168"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117653","dateCreated":"1579887168","dateModified":"1579887168"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I just had a quick look. obsmarker repr hash, are we kind of inventing a way to index obsmarkers? I am pretty sure you people have thought about that, can you explain why you went with obsmarker repr hash instead of including a real index?\n\nAlso, feel free to point me to old discussions if this was discussed earlier.","author":"pulkit","id":"68685","dateCreated":"1536183949","dateModified":"1536183949"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I'll reply to my own question: The context is in D2679.","author":"martinvonz","id":"68491","dateCreated":"1536103749","dateModified":"1536103749"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Why? (Sorry if I'm asking to early and you were just about to send an update.)","author":"martinvonz","id":"68488","dateCreated":"1536103366","dateModified":"1536103366"},{"type":"update","diffId":"10777","author":"lothiraldan","id":"68482","dateCreated":"1536103193","dateModified":"1536103193"}],"dateCreated":"1536103193","dateModified":"1579887169","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"4716","callsign":"HG","title":"lfs: don't add extension to hgrc after clone or share (BC)","author":"indygreg","summary":"Now that repository loading in core supports automatically loading\nthe lfs extension when the \"lfs\" requirement is present, we no\nlonger need to update the .hg\/hgrc of newly-created repos to load\nthe lfs extension!\n\nI'm marking this as BC because it is a change in behavior. But users\nshould not notice unless they create an LFS repo with new Mercurial\nand then attempt to use it with an old versions that doesn't support\nautomatic extension loading.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"36","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117651","dateCreated":"1579887167","dateModified":"1579887167"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117650","dateCreated":"1579887167","dateModified":"1579887167"},{"type":"update","diffId":"11324","author":"indygreg","id":"71559","dateCreated":"1537805608","dateModified":"1537805608"}],"dateCreated":"1537805608","dateModified":"1579887167","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"2679","callsign":"HG","title":"[PoC] obsolete: config option to enable local only obsolescence mode","author":"indygreg","summary":"Our path to enable obsolescence\/evolve in core is to enable\ncreation of markers locally (no exchange) with user-facing behavior\nthat mimics existing behavior as closely as possible. Think of it\nas evolve light.\n\nWe introduce a config option to control this behavior.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"14","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["martinvonz","markand","durin42","lothiraldan","pulkit","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117648","dateCreated":"1579887165","dateModified":"1579887165"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117647","dateCreated":"1579887165","dateModified":"1579887165"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D2679#73347, @martinvonz wrote:\n> Here's a case I just ran into where I would have liked to de-obsolete a commit:\n> \n> 1. Someone queues a patch and pushes to central repo. Repo looks like this:\n\nYou are using the words \"Someone queues a patch\", is your example taken from the current Mercurial project workflow? If so, keep in mind that this workflow is a bit unique. It is not what we refer as \"distributed evolution\" and diverges from it in various ways. In particular, we can highlight the following difference:\n\n\n  - Contributions are exchanged through email or Phabricator. Both ways fail to transfers the associated obsmarkers (and therefore break the evolution chains). \n    Instead people using distributed evolution exchanges changesets through mercurial repositories, fully taking advantage of the obsmarkers data. This makes it possible for them to collaborate on the same feature branch and other evolution benefits (eg: evolution data in code review tools).\n  -  The publication workflow is odds as hundreds of unrelated draft changeset can stack above each other before being published. This is not really the use-case that draft phase and evolution targets.\n> \n> ```\n> o  B\n> |\n> o  A\n> ```\n> \n> 2. I fix a typo and and amend, but I forget to push. \n> 3. I build my own commit on top. My repo:\n> \n> ```\n> o  X\n> |\n> o  B'\n> |\n> o  A\n> ```\nSmall side question: Why are you building X on top of (draft) B', are they related?\n> \n> 4. Someone pushes new patches to central repo. Central repo:\n> \n> ```\n> o  C\n> |\n> o  B\n> |\n> o  A\n> ```\nAdditional side question: Why is C on top of (draft) B. Are they related?\n> \n> 5. I pull from central repo. My repo:\n> \n> ```\n> o  C\n> |\n> x B\n> |\n> | o  X\n> | |\n> | o  B'\n> |\/\n> o  A\n> ```\n> \n> 6. I move my change onto the new upstream and prune my local B' that's now unwanted:\n> \n> ```\n> o X'\n> |\n> o  C\n> |\n> x B\n> |\n> | x B'\n> |\/\n> o  A\n> ```\n> \n> If upstream history was really just a single commit (`C` above), then the obvious thing to do is to just evolve that commit and push it. However, sometimes there is a long chain on top, and in my case there was a separate commit upstream that fixed the typo I fixed when I amended `B` and it would be a little confusing to explain why someone's fix was \"lost\". \n\nI can see two distinct arguments in that description:\n  #  Someone else made a similar fix in an independent changeset, and you want to give them the priority.\n  #  There are many drafts stacked above it and you don't want to rewrite B.\n\n\nRegarding the first argument, the case is easily handled by \"rewinding\" your amend's change and restoring the diff provided by 'B'. The `hg rewind` command deal with this case well: `hg rewind --to B`. The use of `hg prune` in your example is wrong. By using prune, you signal that the full line of change in B' (B' and it predecessors B) is something that is unwanted. So you are not just dropping the change introduced in your amend, but the other associated change.\n\nRegarding the second argument, the one I interpret as it would create too many orphans.\nIt seems to be the consequence of the current Mercurial Project workflow where many unrelated drafts get stacked.\nThe point of the draft phase is to signal that a changeset is safe to be rewritten. In other words that the consequences of such rewriting are acceptable. If you get to the point where rewriting draft no longer feel safe you seem to have a workflow issue.\n\nFor the sake of the current argument, let's assume that the workflow would be fixed in a direction where B would be public. After your pull. In that case, B' would be \"phase-divergent\". Solving that phase-divergence will create a \u0394B changeset with just the fix (you amend change). Rebasing that \u0394B on top of the other fix will make it disappears, giving priority as you intended.\n\n> So I'd prefer to mark B as no longer obsolete. I know I can do that with `hg strip B'`, but that also strips `X`, which is probably not a big loss, but it's a weird side-effect.\n\nYou cannot really strip the obsmarkers between B and B' without stripping B' itself. If B' end up being visible again it's Evolve that would be lost introducing confusion too.\n\n> Perhaps all I'm asking for is a way of dropping the obsmarker between `B` and `B'`. I don't know what the best UI for that would be, though. For now, I guess I'll use `hg strip`.\n\nStripping obsmarkers (and changesets) gets tricky quickly as their might continue to exist elsewhere. [issue5267](https:\/\/bz.mercurial-scm.org\/show_bug.cgi?id=5267) is a good example. There is already a couple of ways to do it (hg strip or hg debugobsolete) but it is currently confined into advanced commands. Before smoothing special case that could benefit stripping (or equivalent feature), it is important to deal with the UI for the main use-case. The use-case that solves both local and distributed evolution with the same command set. We want this commands set to comes first as we know it will be necessary. We can add more advanced commands and concept to deal with stripping afterward.\n\n\nLet me clarify that last part: imagine two commands (or command set, or concepts):\n\n # Command-A handles cases for both local and distributed evolution,\n # Command-B only handles local evolution, but deal with a corner case a bit later.\n\n\nIf we introduce Command-A early, we can foster a good user experience that will be the same for local and distributed case. This makes the \"step\" to distributed usage simple and painless. The overall user experience and other commands will make sure they work smoothly with Command-A. Later, we can introduce Command-B that will deal with specialized cases were Command-A is lacking. Since Command-A is already covering the main use-cases well, Command-B can focus on dealing with the specialized cases only. Each command has clear responsibilities.\n\nOn the other hand, introducing Command-B first will create a user experience that does not cover all of the main use-cases. The later arrival of Command-A will introduce an overlap in responsibilities confusing to users. In addition, it will create a problematic step to move from the local experience to the distributed one. Users will have to \"forget\" their previous usage to be able to get the better of Mercurial, this will create more confusion.","author":"lothiraldan","id":"74342","dateCreated":"1539204897","dateModified":"1539204897"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Here's a case I just ran into where I would have liked to de-obsolete a commit:\n\n1. Someone queues a patch and pushes to central repo. Repo looks like this:\n\n```\no  B\n|\no  A\n```\n\n2. I fix a typo and and amend, but I forget to push. \n3. I build my own commit on top. My repo:\n\n```\no  X\n|\no  B'\n|\no  A\n```\n\n4. Someone pushes new patches to central repo. Central repo:\n\n```\no  C\n|\no  B\n|\no  A\n```\n\n5. I pull from central repo. My repo:\n\n```\no  C\n|\nx B\n|\n| o  X\n| |\n| o  B'\n|\/\no  A\n```\n\n6. I move my change onto the new upstream and prune my local B' that's now unwanted:\n\n```\no X'\n|\no  C\n|\nx B\n|\n| x B'\n|\/\no  A\n```\n\nIf upstream history was really just a single commit (`C` above), then the obvious thing to do is to just evolve that commit and push it. However, sometimes there is a long chain on top, and in my case there was a separate commit upstream that fixed the typo I fixed when I amended `B` and it would be a little confusing to explain why someone's fix was \"lost\".  So I'd prefer to mark B as no longer obsolete. I know I can do that with `hg strip B'`, but that also strips `X`, which is probably not a big loss, but it's a weird side-effect. Perhaps all I'm asking for is a way of dropping the obsmarker between `B` and `B'`. I don't know what the best UI for that would be, though. For now, I guess I'll use `hg strip`.","author":"martinvonz","id":"73348","dateCreated":"1538584552","dateModified":"1538584552"},{"type":"inline","comment":"https:\/\/www.mercurial-scm.org\/wiki\/UIGuideline#naming_config_options","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"1041","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/configitems.py","diffId":"6637","author":"markand","id":"73020","dateCreated":"1538468057","dateModified":"1538468057"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D2679#70935, @durin42 wrote:\n>>>! In D2679#70934, @lothiraldan wrote:\n>>>>! In D2679#69388, @durin42 wrote:\n>>> I'm slowly becoming convinced that the long-unquestioned axiom that \"all markers are distributed globally\" isn't correct, and this is part of why: it's potentially of great value to be able to restore a change by re-pulling it, even though the obsmarkers would normally cause it to be deleted.\n>> Avoiding silent reappearance of the locally obsolete changeset that we see on a remote repository is a core feature of obsolescence. Actually, it is the one issue that prompted the creation of changeset evolution in the first place. \n> \n> There's a difference (in my view) between something accidentally coming back and intentionally coming back. The current state of affairs prevents both. I feel like we can do better.\n\nI feel like detecting if an obsolete changeset is re-added accidentally or intentionally is a near impossible problem. We have submitted code recently to detect when an obsolete changeset is re-added, but again we don't know if it is accidentally or intentionally. The safe path here is to inform the user about suspicious situations and give them the tool to explicitly restore changesets they want to be restored. That why we have been working on an explicit `hg rewind` command in evolve.\n\n> \n>> We and the other people using distributed evolution rely on this behavior on a daily basis. The includes people who picked up the evolve extension on their own and came up with their own workflow without ever speaking to us. We can see some user interfaces adjustment in the future, but the set of synchronized markers and the associated behavior is something we are happy about. It has been well tested in diverse teams and situation for multiple years now.\n> \n> I've brought this up repeatedly and been dismissed with this exact argument every time. I weary of it, because it's not a new argument, it's just blind devotion to the initial design without any attempt at reflection if we can do better.\n\n\nSince I joined Octobus, I've witnessed the exploration of all the remaining uncharted territories and solving of most of the resulting associated challenges. In particular, some important aspects of distributed evolution: instabilities resolutions and efficient obsmarkers exchanges have been solved and have working implementations used on a daily basis. We did alter the initial design when deemed so by new information from exploration or feedback of evolve users.\nDuring these developments, we did not find reasons to challenge the obsolescence core concepts. They, in fact, proved a useful help to build solutions to the distributed evolution challenges. To name a few of these progress and design changes: vocabulary renaming, the missing commands for history exploration and reviving, the new discovery protocol and more recently how to track fold in obsmarkers.\n\nIn a similar way, the numbers and types of distributed evolution users have grown and we had more and more opportunity to exchange with them. We base our plans on more than \"some people using it without complains\". They are a diverse and large corpus of people we have been talking to and studied their workflows. Here again, core concepts, in particular, the global state and instabilities are things that, practically helps teams to use distributed evolution workflows and newcomers to get a good grasp of it. Important behavior designed and tested in the past 5 years, like the exchange behavior, have been battle tested and real people rely on them in their day to day workflow.\n\nSo, it might seem like the same argument, but it is actually a stronger one. The data to back it kept growing in the past couple of years.\n\nIf you need more details, check our recent blog post about evolution: https:\/\/octobus.net\/blog\/2018-09-03-evolve-status-2018-08.html\n\n> I don't dispute that evolution as currently implemented is a good thing, but I feel like there's room for significant improvement while simultaneously simplifying the exchange algorithms. Care to try and convince me why I'm wrong, without anecdotal \"many people use this and haven't complained\" arguments?\n\n\nSure, the proposal in this PoC (\"unobsolete\" all re-added changesets) break basic distributed evolution workflow very quickly. Here are small examples among many. They display simple draft changesets roundtrips:\n\n- Example A:\n\n        - I am working on a repository with a changeset A that is present also on my default server\n        - I amend A into A'\n        - I pull from my default server, the server doesn't know yet that A has been rewritten into A'. A is sent by the server.\n        - A is hidden before the pull. Getting A to be visible again would be confusing for me as I would now have both A and A' \"alive\" at the same time.\n \n- Example B:\n\n        - I am working on a repository with a changeset A that is present also on my default server\n        - I amend A into A'\n        - One of my coworkers push a changeset B on top of A to the server\n        - I pull from my default server\n        - I receive both B and A, and I have all the needed information to stabilize B and continue my work. I don't want A to become \"unobsolete\" on pull.\n\nWe can provide other examples if needed.\n\nCould you give some details about the improvements that you suggest and that what kind of core changes they would require and their effects on distributed evolution?\n","author":"lothiraldan","id":"72403","dateCreated":"1538147960","dateModified":"1538147960"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D2679#70934, @lothiraldan wrote:\n>>>! In D2679#69388, @durin42 wrote:\n>> I'm slowly becoming convinced that the long-unquestioned axiom that \"all markers are distributed globally\" isn't correct, and this is part of why: it's potentially of great value to be able to restore a change by re-pulling it, even though the obsmarkers would normally cause it to be deleted.\n> Avoiding silent reappearance of the locally obsolete changeset that we see on a remote repository is a core feature of obsolescence. Actually, it is the one issue that prompted the creation of changeset evolution in the first place. \n\nThere's a difference (in my view) between something accidentally coming back and intentionally coming back. The current state of affairs prevents both. I feel like we can do better.\n\n> We and the other people using distributed evolution rely on this behavior on a daily basis. The includes people who picked up the evolve extension on their own and came up with their own workflow without ever speaking to us. We can see some user interfaces adjustment in the future, but the set of synchronized markers and the associated behavior is something we are happy about. It has been well tested in diverse teams and situation for multiple years now.\n\nI've brought this up repeatedly and been dismissed with this exact argument every time. I weary of it, because it's not a new argument, it's just blind devotion to the initial design without any attempt at reflection if we can do better. I don't dispute that evolution as currently implemented is a good thing, but I feel like there's room for significant improvement while simultaneously simplifying the exchange algorithms. Care to try and convince me why I'm wrong, without anecdotal \"many people use this and haven't complained\" arguments?\n\n>> It's _super confusing_ when I `hg import` a patch and it seems to work but also immediately disappears, so I've got more sympathy for this PoC series than I do the theoretical purity of markers having any kind of globalness. Does that make sense?\n> This seems like an unrelated user interface issues. We usually warn the user when their working copy becomes obsolete, pointing out to the newest version\/evolution. We have to extend this messages logic to `hg import` to clarify the situation.\n\nI disagree, perhaps unsurprisingly.","author":"durin42","id":"70935","dateCreated":"1537377795","dateModified":"1537377795"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D2679#69388, @durin42 wrote:\n>>>! In D2679#68489, @lothiraldan wrote:\n>> To take a step back, I'm wondering what's the end goal? I remember there was a discussion about having rebase enabled by default, is it related?\n> \n> Getting rebase (and maybe histedit?) enabled by default is my recollection of the rough goal.\n> \n>> \n>> The behavior target by this series (\"unobsolete\" re-pulled changeset) conflicts with the final behavior we want for Changeset Evolution. Intermediate steps are a good way to make progress. I feel like it is important to write down a clear plan when it comes to adding behavior that does not match our final goals. How are we planning to transition from the local-only step to full (ie, distributed) Evolution?\n> \n> I'm slowly becoming convinced that the long-unquestioned axiom that \"all markers are distributed globally\" isn't correct, and this is part of why: it's potentially of great value to be able to restore a change by re-pulling it, even though the obsmarkers would normally cause it to be deleted.\nAvoiding silent reappearance of the locally obsolete changeset that we see on a remote repository is a core feature of obsolescence. Actually, it is the one issue that prompted the creation of changeset evolution in the first place. We and the other people using distributed evolution rely on this behavior on a daily basis. The includes people who picked up the evolve extension on their own and came up with their own workflow without ever speaking to us. We can see some user interfaces adjustment in the future, but the set of synchronized markers and the associated behavior is something we are happy about. It has been well tested in diverse teams and situation for multiple years now.\n> It's _super confusing_ when I `hg import` a patch and it seems to work but also immediately disappears, so I've got more sympathy for this PoC series than I do the theoretical purity of markers having any kind of globalness. Does that make sense?\nThis seems like an unrelated user interface issues. We usually warn the user when their working copy becomes obsolete, pointing out to the newest version\/evolution. We have to extend this messages logic to `hg import` to clarify the situation.\n","author":"lothiraldan","id":"70934","dateCreated":"1537368619","dateModified":"1537368619"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D2679#68489, @lothiraldan wrote:\n> To take a step back, I'm wondering what's the end goal? I remember there was a discussion about having rebase enabled by default, is it related?\n\nGetting rebase (and maybe histedit?) enabled by default is my recollection of the rough goal.\n\n> \n> The behavior target by this series (\"unobsolete\" re-pulled changeset) conflicts with the final behavior we want for Changeset Evolution. Intermediate steps are a good way to make progress. I feel like it is important to write down a clear plan when it comes to adding behavior that does not match our final goals. How are we planning to transition from the local-only step to full (ie, distributed) Evolution?\n\nI'm slowly becoming convinced that the long-unquestioned axiom that \"all markers are distributed globally\" isn't correct, and this is part of why: it's potentially of great value to be able to restore a change by re-pulling it, even though the obsmarkers would normally cause it to be deleted. It's _super confusing_ when I `hg import` a patch and it seems to work but also immediately disappears, so I've got more sympathy for this PoC series than I do the theoretical purity of markers having any kind of globalness. Does that make sense?","author":"durin42","id":"69389","dateCreated":"1536762660","dateModified":"1536762660"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Hi Pulkit,\n\nThanks for your patience. I had a couple of important things to get out of the way before I could turn my attention to this.\n\nI reached out to Ryan and he sent me the code he wrote at the 4.6 Sprint. I made it available here to support the discussion: https:\/\/phab.mercurial-scm.org\/D4479. The core differences in his approach are to filter out obsmarkers affecting the \"re-pulled\" nodes instead of \"stripping\" those markers. The main benefit is to avoid information loss. Stripping markers will break the evolution history, preventing user to benefit from it. Filtering markers out mean that the history will be fully restored if the affected changeset get obsolete again. It can be triggered by the same events.This is a pure implementation detail, having the same user-level effect than the behavior proposed in this Proof of Concept series.\n\nRegarding the implementation of this series, I feel like the current detection code needs to move at a higher level. Having changegroup aware of obsmarkers at such a low level seems wrong and can lead to consistency issues if the bundle contains  obsmarkers. An alternative approach would be to keep track of redundant incoming nodes during changegroup processing (on the transaction object as we are already doing for all new nodes), and process that list at the end of the transaction. We'll give a shot at such implementation, it is useful in other scenarios.\n\nTo take a step back, I'm wondering what's the end goal? I remember there was a discussion about having rebase enabled by default, is it related?\n\nThe behavior target by this series (\"unobsolete\" re-pulled changeset) conflicts with the final behavior we want for Changeset Evolution. Intermediate steps are a good way to make progress. I feel like it is important to write down a clear plan when it comes to adding behavior that does not match our final goals. How are we planning to transition from the local-only step to full (ie, distributed) Evolution?","author":"lothiraldan","id":"68489","dateCreated":"1536103480","dateModified":"1536103480"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Hey @lothiraldan, if not the patches itself, can you please explain the approach taken?\nIf I don't hear from you this week, I will push this series so that we can have enough time testing this in current cycle. Thanks!","author":"pulkit","id":"67297","dateCreated":"1535375938","dateModified":"1535375938"},{"type":"comment","comment":"@lothiraldan Gentle reminder for the series you were talking about.","author":"pulkit","id":"66824","dateCreated":"1534935417","dateModified":"1534935417"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D2679#64079, @lothiraldan wrote:\n>>>! In D2679#62662, @pulkit wrote:\n>> These patches were result of a very extensive discussion about what ways we have to start supporting obsmarkers by default. I will like to push these changesets so that we can try these in this cycle. If I don't hear any concern in a week, I will push them.\n> \n> We made a series with Ryan during the sprint that had the advantage of not requiring to delete obs-markers. I will undust it, rebase it and send it here for making the discussion go forward.\n\nOh nice! That will be great! Looking forward to your series.","author":"pulkit","id":"64233","dateCreated":"1533639536","dateModified":"1533639536"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D2679#62662, @pulkit wrote:\n> These patches were result of a very extensive discussion about what ways we have to start supporting obsmarkers by default. I will like to push these changesets so that we can try these in this cycle. If I don't hear any concern in a week, I will push them.\n\nWe made a series with Ryan during the sprint that had the advantage of not requiring to delete obs-markers. I will undust it, rebase it and send it here for making the discussion go forward.","author":"lothiraldan","id":"64080","dateCreated":"1533587987","dateModified":"1533587987"},{"type":"comment","comment":"These patches were result of a very extensive discussion about what ways we have to start supporting obsmarkers by default. I will like to push these changesets so that we can try these in this cycle. If I don't hear any concern in a week, I will push them.","author":"pulkit","id":"62663","dateCreated":"1533162260","dateModified":"1533162260"},{"type":"update","diffId":"6637","author":"indygreg","id":"43207","dateCreated":"1520210571","dateModified":"1520210571"}],"dateCreated":"1520210571","dateModified":"1579887165","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"5019","callsign":"HG","title":"pager: disable auto pager if we think it doesn't support F, R, X","author":"spectral","summary":"","testPlan":"","lineCount":"164","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["indygreg","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117645","dateCreated":"1579887164","dateModified":"1579887164"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117644","dateCreated":"1579887164","dateModified":"1579887164"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Won't this iterate integers on Python 3?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"1120","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/ui.py","diffId":"11937","author":"indygreg","id":"75313","dateCreated":"1539368646","dateModified":"1539368646"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I need to review this on a fresher brain. But I'll be honest, I'm not sure how I feel about this.\n\nDo you know of other programs that jump through similar hoops to properly set up a pager?","author":"indygreg","id":"75312","dateCreated":"1539368646","dateModified":"1539368646"},{"type":"update","diffId":"11937","author":"spectral","id":"75284","dateCreated":"1539366293","dateModified":"1539366293"}],"dateCreated":"1539366293","dateModified":"1579887164","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"5102","callsign":"HG","title":"beautifygraph: add configs for customizing the characters","author":"hooper","summary":"I figure we should keep this out of graphmod.py and templatekw.py for now.\nMoving the extension functionality out of hgext is a separate issue.\n\nCalling ui.config() inside getgraphnode seems like it might slow things down,\nbut it needs to happen there because of the template keyword. We probably want\nto honor config overrides, so we can't cache glyphs at this level.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"208","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["spectral","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117612","dateCreated":"1579887150","dateModified":"1579887150"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117611","dateCreated":"1579887150","dateModified":"1579887150"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I'll elaborate a bit. I think the idea of using unicode to make the graph good looking is flawed. There are no characters that properly serve common cases like this:\n\n```\no\n|\n \\\n  o\n```\n\nThat's part of why there was some disagreement in early discussion of this extension.\n\nI think it's a bad user experience, because if the graph looks 95% like a connected drawing, these broken areas are going to look like malfunctions (whereas we started with a stylized ascii drawing where the limitations are obvious to the user).\n\nAdditionally, the existing graphlog output is lossy. The two pipes in this example do not have the same meaning:\n\n```\no\n|\n|\n \\\n   o\n```\n\nEven if we had the unicode characters\/custom font needed to make this work, we would need at least 5 configurable variants of what is currently just a pipe. You would need hundreds of distinct characters to support all combinations of the 8 horizontal and diagonal edges in each character\/cell of the graph rendering. More than double that to support dashed lines. Maybe exclude some unused characters. It's hard to imagine making that easy to configure.\n\nYou can also imagine having the graphlog output optionally use only horizontal\/vertical edges so this can be done properly with box drawing characters. This is would complicate graphlog itself considerably, regardless of configuration.\n\nMeanwhile, this patch would be useful to some of our users, and it keeps the problems contained within the extension.","author":"hooper","id":"77628","dateCreated":"1540934965","dateModified":"1540934965"},{"type":"comment","comment":"hooper and I talked at the sprint, and they wrote up the following for why they feel we should keep this out of graphmod\/templatekw for now:\n\n> I don't think configurable graph log characters in core is a great idea right now, since it makes the empty promise that you can make logs look correct by using common fonts. E.g. the problem that pipe characters are used in several situations that just can't be handled well by one character.\n\nAs a specific example, there's no unicode line drawing characters that are fully-extended lines at 0 degrees (straight up) and 135 degrees (down to the right to the corner of the character box), so there will always be cases that can't really be represented \"perfectly\".\n\nI don't generally agree with this reasoning - limitations of unicode should not be a reason to require that we go through a separate extension like this.  The reasoning for the extension instead of just making the actual graph characters customizable was two-fold, if I remember correctly:\n\n1. there is currently some awkward code to handle extending one of the characters used to draw parent\/grandparent lines for a few lines and then switch to the other. (https:\/\/www.mercurial-scm.org\/repo\/hg\/file\/tip\/tests\/test-glog.t#l3041 shows this in action) - the code to implement this is not unicode safe (at least in python2)\n2. the current graphlog code does not currently have config knobs to control every character, I think. \n\n\nI think we should fix the code issue in #1 (I just sent D5112 for this), and then we can extended graphlog to have whatever character(s) we need, instead of attempting to do the replacements in an extension like we're currently doing?  The extension could just become a set of \"recommended\" values for these config knobs.\n","author":"spectral","id":"76474","dateCreated":"1539693777","dateModified":"1539693777"},{"type":"update","diffId":"12138","author":"hooper","id":"76357","dateCreated":"1539526671","dateModified":"1539526671"},{"type":"update","diffId":"12130","author":"hooper","id":"76302","dateCreated":"1539519730","dateModified":"1539519730"}],"dateCreated":"1539519730","dateModified":"1579887150","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"1701","callsign":"HG","title":"logtoprocess: add the possibility to not popup a console","author":"lothiraldan","summary":"Starting a subprocess on Windows with `DETACHED_PROCESS |\nCREATE_NEW_PROCESS_GROUP` as startup info means starting a console GUI window\nin almost all cases. If we add a logtoprocess for commandfinish and the prompt\ndo some hg calls, it will create a short-lived GUI window which is annoying\nfor end-users.\n\nCreating a subprocess with `CREATE_CONSOLE` instead seems to no start a\nconsole window but could have other side-effects so it kept under a config\nknob.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"13","dependsOn":["1700"],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["yuja","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117609","dateCreated":"1579887149","dateModified":"1579887149"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117608","dateCreated":"1579887149","dateModified":"1579887149"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Can we add `CREATE_NEW_PROCESS_GROUP` ?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"66","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/logtoprocess.py","diffId":"4468","author":"yuja","id":"29101","dateCreated":"1513346507","dateModified":"1513346507"},{"type":"comment","comment":"> but could have other side-effects so it kept under a config knob.\n\nMy two cents, `experimental.*` might be better if the config knob exists as\na workaround for an unknown bug.","author":"yuja","id":"29100","dateCreated":"1513346507","dateModified":"1513346507"},{"type":"update","diffId":"4468","author":"lothiraldan","id":"29029","dateCreated":"1513332660","dateModified":"1513332660"}],"dateCreated":"1513332660","dateModified":"1579887149","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"5295","callsign":"HG","title":"branchmap: define a hasbranch() to find whether a branch exists or not","author":"pulkit","summary":"This patch introduces a branchmap.hasbranch() function to find whether a branch\nexists or not. I was going through profile of one of most used command\ninternally on server side and found that we are spending ~50% of time finding\nwhether a branch exists or not. We are reading the branchmap cache, building the\nrelated object and then finding whether a branch exists or not which is quite\nslow on repositories which have more than 10k named branches.\n\nIn the new function, we just iterate over the whole branchmap cache and find\nthat whether a branch name is present or not. This is essentially\nbranchmap.read() but without any hash validation, creation of the branchcache()\nobject.\n\nFollowing were the improvements observed:\n\nBefore:\n\n`hg log -b . -l 1`: 0.53 sec\n`hg log -b <last_branch_in_the_cache> -l 1`: 1.12 sec\n\nAfter:\n\n`hg log -b . -l 1`: 0.32 sec\n`hg log -b <last_branch_in_the_cache> -l 1`: 0.95 sec\n\n\nThere we no improvements observed in `hg log -r <branch_name>`, if the log limit\nis greater than 1, and while using revsets.\n\nI have added a TODO here that we can use binary search instead of plain\niteration for finding whether a branch name exists or not. I got to know that\nMartijn Pieters is working on some related stuff to load branchmap in memory as\nraw data and decided to implement binary search on top of that.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"29","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["yuja","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117606","dateCreated":"1579887147","dateModified":"1579887147"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117605","dateCreated":"1579887147","dateModified":"1579887147"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I don't think it's good idea to re-scan the cache file per hasbranch() call.\nInstead, we'll probably need a lazy parser backed by a in-memory cache data.\nThe current cache file format is text-based, which wouldn't be easily bisected\nwithout loading (or memmap) the whole content.\n\n> +def hasbranch(repo, branchname):\n> +    \"\"\"check whether a branchname exists in the repo or not by reading the\n> +    branchmap cache\"\"\"\n> +\n> +    if not repo.cachevfs.exists(_filename(repo)):\n> +        # branchmap file is not present, let's go repo.branchmap() route which\n> +        # will create that file\n> +        return branchname in repo.branchmap()\n> +\n> +    # TODO: implement binary-search here for faster search\n> +    with repo.cachevfs(_filename(repo)) as f:\n> +        f = repo.cachevfs(_filename(repo))\n> +        lineiter = iter(f)\n> +        next(lineiter).rstrip('\\n').split(\" \", 2)\n\nNeed to check if the cache file is valid.\n\n> +        for l in lineiter:\n> +            l = l.rstrip('\\n')\n> +            if not l:\n> +                continue\n> +            label = l.split(\" \", 2)[2]\n> +            label = encoding.tolocal(label.strip())\n> +            if label == branchname:\n\nAnd maybe need to check if the node exists.\n\n> +                return True\n> +    return False","author":"yuja","id":"78895","dateCreated":"1543118662","dateModified":"1543118662"},{"type":"update","diffId":"12582","author":"pulkit","id":"78822","dateCreated":"1542887394","dateModified":"1542887394"}],"dateCreated":"1542887394","dateModified":"1579887147","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"5308","callsign":"HG","title":"store: don't pass 'atomictemp=True' while appending to fncache","author":"pulkit","summary":"Appending to an atomictemp file means that the entire file is copied first.\nThanks to Yuya for suggesting.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"2","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["yuja","mjpieters","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117603","dateCreated":"1579887146","dateModified":"1579887146"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117602","dateCreated":"1579887146","dateModified":"1579887146"},{"type":"comment","comment":">   > As I said, we'll also need to somehow hide partial data from another\n>   >  reader processes. There's no read lock.\n>   \n>   \n>   Read locks! was there a previous attempt on implementing them? I will try to take a shot at implementing them. I am unable to find any good detail except mentions in wiki or mailing list archive.\n\nAnother option is to ignore trailing data after `\\n`. That's how the revlog\nparser gets around partially-written entry.\n\nIn either way, writing fncache non-atomically wouldn't be strictly compatible\nwith older hg clients. I think that's okayish, but I should note that.","author":"yuja","id":"79385","dateCreated":"1543492790","dateModified":"1543492790"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! Pasting Yuja's reply to that from mailing list:\n>>>! In D5308#78989, @pulkit wrote:\n>>>>! In D5308#78985, @yuja wrote:\n>>>> --- a\/mercurial\/store.py\n>>>> +++ b\/mercurial\/store.py\n>>>> @@ -486,7 +486,7 @@\n>>>>          if self.addls:\n>>>>             # if we have just new entries, let's append them to the fncache\n>>>>              tr.addbackup('fncache')\n>>>> -            fp = self.vfs('fncache', mode='ab', atomictemp=True)\n>>>> +            fp = self.vfs('fncache', mode='ab')\n>>> \n>>> Ah, no. addbackup() creates hardlink, which means fncache can't be updated in\n>>> place. Also, the reader wouldn't handle partially-written fncache well.\n>> \n>> do we need to call `addbackup()` if we are just appending?\n>\n> We need a mechanism to restore the original content on rollback. IIUC,\n> it's `tr.add()` for append-only files.\n>\n> As I said, we'll also need to somehow hide partial data from another\n> reader processes. There's no read lock.\n\nRead locks! was there a previous attempt on implementing them? I will try to take a shot at implementing them. I am unable to find any good detail except mentions in wiki or mailing list archive.","author":"pulkit","id":"79002","dateCreated":"1543424805","dateModified":"1543424805"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D5308#78985, @yuja wrote:\n>> --- a\/mercurial\/store.py\n>> +++ b\/mercurial\/store.py\n>> @@ -486,7 +486,7 @@\n>>          if self.addls:\n>>              # if we have just new entries, let's append them to the fncache\n>>              tr.addbackup('fncache')\n>> -            fp = self.vfs('fncache', mode='ab', atomictemp=True)\n>> +            fp = self.vfs('fncache', mode='ab')\n> \n> Ah, no. addbackup() creates hardlink, which means fncache can't be updated in\n> place. Also, the reader wouldn't handle partially-written fncache well.\n\ndo we need to call `addbackup()` if we are just appending?","author":"pulkit","id":"78989","dateCreated":"1543326786","dateModified":"1543326786"},{"type":"comment","comment":"> --- a\/mercurial\/store.py\n> +++ b\/mercurial\/store.py\n> @@ -486,7 +486,7 @@\n>          if self.addls:\n>              # if we have just new entries, let's append them to the fncache\n>              tr.addbackup('fncache')\n> -            fp = self.vfs('fncache', mode='ab', atomictemp=True)\n> +            fp = self.vfs('fncache', mode='ab')\n\nAh, no. addbackup() creates hardlink, which means fncache can't be updated in\nplace. Also, the reader wouldn't handle partially-written fncache well.","author":"yuja","id":"78986","dateCreated":"1543325866","dateModified":"1543325866"},{"type":"update","diffId":"12610","author":"pulkit","id":"78976","dateCreated":"1543324956","dateModified":"1543324956"}],"dateCreated":"1543324956","dateModified":"1579887146","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"2880","callsign":"HG","title":"bundle: add the possibility to bundle bookmarks (issue5792)","author":"lothiraldan","summary":"Also take the wlock when unbundling. It shouldn't have a big impact on\nperformance.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"143","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["indygreg","baymax"],"ccs":["martinvonz","indygreg","pulkit","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117600","dateCreated":"1579887145","dateModified":"1579887145"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117599","dateCreated":"1579887145","dateModified":"1579887145"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Just a reminder that this has not been queued yet.","author":"martinvonz","id":"79389","dateCreated":"1543515570","dateModified":"1543515570"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I tried adding such scenarios but failed to produce a divergence scenario, no idea why.\n\nI don't think I will have time to debug the issue before the freeze, so let's skip this changeset for 4.6","replyTo":"53793","isNewFile":"1","line":"37","lineLength":"26","path":"tests\/test-bundle-bookmarks.t","diffId":"7077","author":"lothiraldan","id":"54248","dateCreated":"1523950897","dateModified":"1523950897"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I think it should be the same thing as pulling from another repo. Try putting the same changes in another repo and pulling from it without giving the path a name (nothing in [paths] config). I haven't checked what suffix will be used on the divergent bookmark, but it probably makes sense to use the same here (perhaps it's just going to be \"D1@1\" as I guessed before).","replyTo":"53729","isNewFile":"1","line":"37","lineLength":"26","path":"tests\/test-bundle-bookmarks.t","diffId":"7077","author":"martinvonz","id":"53793","dateCreated":"1523724103","dateModified":"1523724103"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I have added such test and indeed this case is not handled right now. I'm not aware of how Mercurial handle this case when exchanging bookmarks, I will need to take a look at the code to find out.\n\nWhat is the correct behavior here? Change the existing bookmark or the bookmark from the bundle?","replyTo":"46275","isNewFile":"1","line":"37","lineLength":"26","path":"tests\/test-bundle-bookmarks.t","diffId":"7077","author":"lothiraldan","id":"53729","dateCreated":"1523698843","dateModified":"1523698843"},{"type":"update","diffId":"8263","author":"lothiraldan","id":"53727","dateCreated":"1523698706","dateModified":"1523698706"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D2880#52559, @indygreg wrote:\n> What's the status of this patch? Is it still reviewable? If so, let's get a rebased version submitted, just in case things have changed.\n\nI need to update the patch according to @martinvoz comment.\n\nI was also waiting on your comment on https:\/\/phab.mercurial-scm.org\/D2880#46263, do you think we will keep the option once the bundlespec system is revamped? If yes, we can make the config option a non-experimental one. But if it will be dropped soon, I think keeping it experimental until it's dropped is preferable. What do you think?","author":"lothiraldan","id":"52583","dateCreated":"1523555228","dateModified":"1523555228"},{"type":"comment","comment":"What's the status of this patch? Is it still reviewable? If so, let's get a rebased version submitted, just in case things have changed.","author":"indygreg","id":"52560","dateCreated":"1523549760","dateModified":"1523549760"},{"type":"reject","author":"indygreg","id":"52559","dateCreated":"1523549760","dateModified":"1523549760"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Can we have a similar test case where we create divergence? Create a fork in the graph in the debugdrawdag call above. Let's say you have commit F that branches off of B, then do something like this:\n\n```\n$ hg bundle --all bundle\n$ hg strip --no-backup C\n$ hg bookmarks -f -r F D1\n$ hg unbundle -q bundle\n$ hg log -G -T '{desc} {bookmarks}\\n'\n  o  E\n  |\n  o  D D1 D2\n  |\n  o  C\n  |\n  |  o F D1@1\n  |\/\n  o  B\n  |\n  o  A A1\n```\n\nI don't know if \"@1\" is the appropriate divergence marker, but I can't think of a better one. I haven't even looked at your code to try to guess what it would be in practice (if it would work at all).","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"37","lineLength":"26","path":"tests\/test-bundle-bookmarks.t","diffId":"7077","author":"martinvonz","id":"46275","dateCreated":"1521218729","dateModified":"1521218729"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I was afraid we might have to delete this option once we have the discussion about bundle spec format with @indygreg. If that would be the case, I would feel more comfortable deleting an experimental option.\n\nIf we agreed on moving bundle-phases out of experimental, I guess we can do the same for bundle-bookmarks.\n\n@indygreg Do you think we would still have this option around once we have new-style bundle spec?","replyTo":"46262","isNewFile":"1","line":"422","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/configitems.py","diffId":"7077","author":"lothiraldan","id":"46264","dateCreated":"1521208181","dateModified":"1521208181"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Any reason why we have all these config option as experimental? We talked at sprint about moving things out of experimental and we agreed on `experimental.bundle-phases`. This one sounds similar.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"422","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/configitems.py","diffId":"7077","author":"pulkit","id":"46262","dateCreated":"1521206865","dateModified":"1521206865"},{"type":"update","diffId":"7077","author":"lothiraldan","id":"46256","dateCreated":"1521206506","dateModified":"1521206506"}],"dateCreated":"1521206506","dateModified":"1579887145","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"5503","callsign":"HG","title":"vfs: add support for repo names with `$` when using with env vars (issue5739)","author":"navaneeth.suresh","summary":"`$ foo=bar hg root` fails to recognise the repo `$foo`. I stopped expanding env\nvars from vfs when there exists a repo with the same name as the env var.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"12","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["yuja","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117597","dateCreated":"1579887143","dateModified":"1579887143"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117596","dateCreated":"1579887143","dateModified":"1579887143"},{"type":"comment","comment":">   > This is logically incorrect. The problem is that we're doing variable\n>   >  expansion at too lower layer. `vfs(expand(user_specified_path))` makes\n>   >  some sense, but `vfs(expand(getcwd()))` is clearly wrong. And the vfs class\n>   >  can't know where the `base` comes from.\n>   \n>   If I add a condition for expanding env var if present in `hgrc`, can this work as a fix?\n\nMaybe no. Where do you intend to add such code? vfs doesn't know where the path\ncomes from. Neither does localrepo.\n\n>   If the only solution for this is shifting path expansion from `vfs` class, where do you\n>   think it can be?\n\nSomewhere specifying repository path read from hgrc or user input.","author":"yuja","id":"81826","dateCreated":"1547043138","dateModified":"1547043138"},{"type":"comment","comment":"> This is logically incorrect. The problem is that we're doing variable\n> expansion at too lower layer. `vfs(expand(user_specified_path))` makes\n> some sense, but `vfs(expand(getcwd()))` is clearly wrong. And the vfs class\n> can't know where the `base` comes from.\n\nIf I add a condition for expanding env var if present in `hgrc`, can this work as a fix?\nIf the only solution for this is shifting path expansion from `vfs` class, where do you\nthink it can be?","author":"navaneeth.suresh","id":"81684","dateCreated":"1546920534","dateModified":"1546920534"},{"type":"comment","comment":">      def __init__(self, base, audit=True, cacheaudited=False, expandpath=False,\n>                   realpath=False):\n> +        if '$' in base and os.path.isdir(base):\n> +            # when there exists a repo '$foo' and an env var foo=bar, stop\n> +            # expanding path. refer issue5739.\n> +            expandpath = False\n\nThis is logically incorrect. The problem is that we're doing variable\nexpansion at too lower layer. `vfs(expand(user_specified_path))` makes\nsome sense, but `vfs(expand(getcwd()))` is clearly wrong. And the vfs class\ncan't know where the `base` comes from.","author":"yuja","id":"81561","dateCreated":"1546867921","dateModified":"1546867921"},{"type":"update","diffId":"13046","author":"navaneeth.suresh","id":"81547","dateCreated":"1546862928","dateModified":"1546862928"},{"type":"update","diffId":"13025","author":"navaneeth.suresh","id":"81425","dateCreated":"1546850305","dateModified":"1546850305"}],"dateCreated":"1546850305","dateModified":"1579887144","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"5539","callsign":"HG","title":"style: run yapf on a subset of mercurial","author":"durin42","summary":"I've tried to pick knobs that more or less conform to our current\nstyle. I ran the formatter on the same set of files as the black\nproposal (see D5064), but it resulted in many fewer edits.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"171","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117594","dateCreated":"1579887142","dateModified":"1579887142"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117593","dateCreated":"1579887142","dateModified":"1579887142"},{"type":"inline","comment":"We could force this to one-per-line by adding a trailing comma.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"53","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/scmwindows.py","diffId":"13110","author":"durin42","id":"81887","dateCreated":"1547066206","dateModified":"1547066206"},{"type":"inline","comment":"yapf bug here, filed as https:\/\/github.com\/google\/yapf\/issues\/662","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"57","lineLength":"1","path":"mercurial\/minifileset.py","diffId":"13110","author":"durin42","id":"81886","dateCreated":"1547066206","dateModified":"1547066206"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I see a few minor issues here, but it's at least plausible?","author":"durin42","id":"81885","dateCreated":"1547066206","dateModified":"1547066206"},{"type":"update","diffId":"13110","author":"durin42","id":"81877","dateCreated":"1547065732","dateModified":"1547065732"}],"dateCreated":"1547065732","dateModified":"1579887142","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"5566","callsign":"HG","title":"revlog: rename revlog I\/O classes to reflect version (API)","author":"indygreg","summary":"I never liked these names. They imply the existence of exactly\n2 revlog versions. We're hacking on version 2. So let's\nintroduce better names.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"14","dependsOn":["5565"],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117591","dateCreated":"1579887140","dateModified":"1579887140"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117590","dateCreated":"1579887140","dateModified":"1579887140"},{"type":"update","diffId":"13162","author":"indygreg","id":"82190","dateCreated":"1547166758","dateModified":"1547166758"}],"dateCreated":"1547166758","dateModified":"1579887140","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"5567","callsign":"HG","title":"revlog: assign revlog._io in version lookup conditional","author":"indygreg","summary":"A single version lookup is desirable.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"9","dependsOn":["5566"],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117588","dateCreated":"1579887139","dateModified":"1579887139"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117587","dateCreated":"1579887139","dateModified":"1579887139"},{"type":"update","diffId":"13163","author":"indygreg","id":"82200","dateCreated":"1547166761","dateModified":"1547166761"}],"dateCreated":"1547166761","dateModified":"1579887139","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"5495","callsign":"HG","title":"revset: add \"branch\" positional arguments to the merge revset","author":"angel.ezquerra","summary":"Make it possible to only include those merge revisions that are merges with one\nor more specific branches (passed as a positional argument that can receive\neither a single branch name or a regular expression). All merge revisions are\nshown by default (i.e. if no \"merge with\" branch or expression is specified).","testPlan":"","lineCount":"124","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["mharbison72","mjpieters","lothiraldan","pulkit","yuja","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117585","dateCreated":"1579887138","dateModified":"1579887138"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117584","dateCreated":"1579887138","dateModified":"1579887138"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Thank you Matt. I just did that.\n\nCheers,\n\nAngel","author":"angel.ezquerra","id":"82634","dateCreated":"1547625859","dateModified":"1547625859"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D5495#82416, @angel.ezquerra wrote:\n> I've sent an updated set of patches, following your recommendations. There are 2 patches now, since each includes its own tests. This means that the 3rd patch on the original patch set is no longer needed. However I don't know what is the best way to tell that to phabricator...\n\nI think you should be able to go to that 3rd patch, and set it to abandoned in the actions at the bottom.\n\n\n","author":"mharbison72","id":"82590","dateCreated":"1547618397","dateModified":"1547618397"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D5495#82397, @yuja wrote:\n> Generally looks good.\n> \n> Can you fix a couple of nits? And if possible, fold the tests from D5577\n> into this and the next patch. We prefer including relevant test in each\n> commit.\n> \n>> -@predicate('merge()', safe=True)\n>> +@predicate('merge(withbranch)', safe=True)\n> \n> `merge([withbranch])` as it is an optional parameter.\n> \n>>  def merge(repo, subset, x):\n>> -    \"\"\"Changeset is a merge changeset.\n>> +    \"\"\"Changeset is a merge changeset\n>> +\n>> +    All merge revisions are returned by default. If a \"withbranch\"\n>> +    pattern is provided only merges with (i.e. whose second parent\n>> +    belongs to) those branches that match the pattern will be returned.\n>> +    The simplest pattern is the name of a single branch. It is also\n>> +    possible to specify a regular expression by starting the pattern\n>> +    with \"re:\". This can be used to match more than one branch\n>> +    (e.g. \"re:branch1|branch2\").\n>>      \"\"\"\n>>      # i18n: \"merge\" is a keyword\n>> -    getargs(x, 0, 0, _(\"merge takes no arguments\"))\n>> +    args = getargsdict(x, 'merge', 'withbranch')\n>> +    withbranch = ''\n>> +    if 'withbranch' in args:\n>> +        withbranch = getstring(args['withbranch'],\n>> +                               _('withbranch argument must be a string'))\n>> +        kind, branchname, branchmatcher = stringutil.stringmatcher(withbranch)\n> \n> Can you merge this with the next `if withbranch:` block to reduce the number\n> of conditionally defined variables referenced later?\n> \n>>      cl = repo.changelog\n>> -    return subset.filter(lambda r: cl.parentrevs(r)[1] != -1,\n>> -                         condrepr='<merge>')\n>> +    # create the function that will be used to filter the subset\n>> +    if withbranch:\n> \n>> +        # matchfn is a function that returns true when a revision\n>> +        # is a merge and the second parent belongs to a branch that\n>> +        # matches the withbranch pattern (which can be a literal or a regex)\n> \n> Nit: these comments seem a bit verbose. It's documented in stringmatcher().\n> \n>> +        if kind == 'literal':\n>> +            matchfn = lambda r: (cl.parentrevs(r)[1] != -1\n>> +                                 and repo[r].p2().branch() == withbranch)\n>> +        else:\n>> +            matchfn = lambda r: (cl.parentrevs(r)[1] != -1\n>> +                                 and branchmatcher(repo[r].p2().branch()))\n> \n> If we don't have anything special about the `literal` kind, we can always use\n> the `branchmatcher()`. `if kind == 'literal'` isn't needed.\n\n\n\n>>! In D5495#82407, @yuja wrote:\n>>   What about making the argument a revset instead of a branch name. You can get the same result `merge(branch(\"foo\")` but have a more expressive result `merge(only(4.8, 4.7))` ?\n> \n> That's basically a simpler form of my `filter()` proposal.\n> \n> The problem of `merge(branch(\"foo\"))` is that it's ambiguous which revision\n> the expression will be tested against. It could be expressed as\n> `merge(p2=branch(\"foo\"))` to disambiguate, but this syntax isn't generic\n> enough to express the `samebranch=True` constraint. So if we want a truly\n> expressive syntax, we'll need something like a lambda function.\n> \n> ```\n> filtereach(merge(), p2(_) & branch(\"foo\"))\n> filtereach(merge(), samebranch(parents(_))\n> ```\n> \n> I agreed with Angel in that `merge(withbranch=name)` would be useful enough\n> to have a dedicated syntax, but I'm open to other ideas like\n> `merge(p1=expr, p2=expr)`.\n\n@lothiraldan , your proposal is interesting but as @yuja said it is less generic that introducing a full blown filter function. Also, to be really flexible it would require some way to refer to the p2 revision (i.e. you'd need to introduce an implicit or explicit reference to each of the p1 or p2 revisions). I think this would make the syntax for the most common use cases that I want to cover too complex. That being said, the proposed syntax leaves open the door for introducing such revset based filtering in the future if needed (although I think that a generic filter function would be more useful).\n\n@yuja  , I've sent an updated set of patches, following your recommendations. There are 2 patches now, since each includes its own tests. This means that the 3rd patch on the original patch set is no longer needed. However I don't know what is the best way to tell that to phabricator...","author":"angel.ezquerra","id":"82416","dateCreated":"1547509014","dateModified":"1547509014"},{"type":"update","diffId":"13210","author":"angel.ezquerra","id":"82413","dateCreated":"1547508400","dateModified":"1547508400"},{"type":"comment","comment":">   What about making the argument a revset instead of a branch name. You can get the same result `merge(branch(\"foo\")` but have a more expressive result `merge(only(4.8, 4.7))` ?\n\nThat's basically a simpler form of my `filter()` proposal.\n\nThe problem of `merge(branch(\"foo\"))` is that it's ambiguous which revision\nthe expression will be tested against. It could be expressed as\n`merge(p2=branch(\"foo\"))` to disambiguate, but this syntax isn't generic\nenough to express the `samebranch=True` constraint. So if we want a truly\nexpressive syntax, we'll need something like a lambda function.\n\n```\nfiltereach(merge(), p2(_) & branch(\"foo\"))\nfiltereach(merge(), samebranch(parents(_))\n```\n\nI agreed with Angel in that `merge(withbranch=name)` would be useful enough\nto have a dedicated syntax, but I'm open to other ideas like\n`merge(p1=expr, p2=expr)`.","author":"yuja","id":"82407","dateCreated":"1547472644","dateModified":"1547472644"},{"type":"comment","comment":"What about making the argument a revset instead of a branch name. You can get the same result `merge(branch(\"foo\")` but have a more expressive result `merge(only(4.8, 4.7))` ?\n\n(Sorry to be a bit late to the party) ","author":"lothiraldan","id":"82404","dateCreated":"1547468468","dateModified":"1547468468"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Generally looks good.\n\nCan you fix a couple of nits? And if possible, fold the tests from D5577\ninto this and the next patch. We prefer including relevant test in each\ncommit.\n\n> -@predicate('merge()', safe=True)\n> +@predicate('merge(withbranch)', safe=True)\n\n`merge([withbranch])` as it is an optional parameter.\n\n>  def merge(repo, subset, x):\n> -    \"\"\"Changeset is a merge changeset.\n> +    \"\"\"Changeset is a merge changeset\n> +\n> +    All merge revisions are returned by default. If a \"withbranch\"\n> +    pattern is provided only merges with (i.e. whose second parent\n> +    belongs to) those branches that match the pattern will be returned.\n> +    The simplest pattern is the name of a single branch. It is also\n> +    possible to specify a regular expression by starting the pattern\n> +    with \"re:\". This can be used to match more than one branch\n> +    (e.g. \"re:branch1|branch2\").\n>      \"\"\"\n>      # i18n: \"merge\" is a keyword\n> -    getargs(x, 0, 0, _(\"merge takes no arguments\"))\n> +    args = getargsdict(x, 'merge', 'withbranch')\n> +    withbranch = ''\n> +    if 'withbranch' in args:\n> +        withbranch = getstring(args['withbranch'],\n> +                               _('withbranch argument must be a string'))\n> +        kind, branchname, branchmatcher = stringutil.stringmatcher(withbranch)\n\nCan you merge this with the next `if withbranch:` block to reduce the number\nof conditionally defined variables referenced later?\n\n>      cl = repo.changelog\n> -    return subset.filter(lambda r: cl.parentrevs(r)[1] != -1,\n> -                         condrepr='<merge>')\n> +    # create the function that will be used to filter the subset\n> +    if withbranch:\n\n> +        # matchfn is a function that returns true when a revision\n> +        # is a merge and the second parent belongs to a branch that\n> +        # matches the withbranch pattern (which can be a literal or a regex)\n\nNit: these comments seem a bit verbose. It's documented in stringmatcher().\n\n> +        if kind == 'literal':\n> +            matchfn = lambda r: (cl.parentrevs(r)[1] != -1\n> +                                 and repo[r].p2().branch() == withbranch)\n> +        else:\n> +            matchfn = lambda r: (cl.parentrevs(r)[1] != -1\n> +                                 and branchmatcher(repo[r].p2().branch()))\n\nIf we don't have anything special about the `literal` kind, we can always use\nthe `branchmatcher()`. `if kind == 'literal'` isn't needed.","author":"yuja","id":"82397","dateCreated":"1547435479","dateModified":"1547435479"},{"type":"update","diffId":"13204","author":"angel.ezquerra","id":"82387","dateCreated":"1547419518","dateModified":"1547419518"},{"type":"comment","comment":">   This would not make it possible to select multiple \"merged with\" branches by doing: hg log -r \"merge(feature1, feature2)\"\n>   Instead I guess you are proposing that for that use case we force the user to do: hg log -r \"merge('re:(feature1|feature2)')\n>   \n>   Did I understand you correctly?\n\nYes. And we can introduce other prefixes of string matcher if `re:` seemed\nunnecessarily complex.\n\nEDIT: or introduce `merge(withbranch=(foo, bar))` syntax. This works, but is really new\nsyntax so I don't want to go this way at this point.","author":"yuja","id":"82310","dateCreated":"1547259824","dateModified":"1547260148"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D5495#82036, @yuja wrote:\n>>   I think it would be a good idea to make the \"branch\" arguments more flexible. One option could be to use a stringmatcher to add support for regular expressions as you suggest. I can look into that. However there may be some other options worth exploring. The one you suggest is very interesting although I find the syntax a bit complicated for the common use cases that I want to enable which are:\n>>   \n>>   1. Ignore merges from the same branch, which in a named-branch based branching strategy are usually irrelevant\n>>   2. Look into merges with a specific branch (e.g. which branches have been merged with the default branch)?\n>>   \n>>   In my experience those two are the ones that are the most common and I think we should try to make the easy to use. That is, I think that even if mercurial had a filter function like the one you propose I would still want to be able to express those 2 common merge properties in a simple way.\n> \n> Yep, I agree with that.\n> \n>>   That being said, I really like your idea since I often find myself being unable to express what I want with a revset (as powerful as those are) because of the lack of a filtering mechanism. Adding a generic filter function would be very useful indeed. I'm not sure if the syntax you propose would work as is though. It seems that it would need a new \"&\" operator? In any case I believe that it is out of the scope of this particular set of patches. Do you agree?\n> \n> Yes. Actually I have a PoC-level implementation of generic filtering predicate,\n> which can be reviewed separately.\n> \n>> If so I can focus on improving this patch by adding the stringmatcher as you suggest (as it seems I'm not the only one who thinks this would be useful). Is that ok?\n> \n> Sounds good to me. To be clear, I want `'withbranch'` instead of\n> `'*withbranch'`, because the withbranch option doesn't look like a first-class\n> parameter of the `merge()` predicate.\n\nThis would not make it possible to select multiple \"merged with\" branches by doing: hg log -r \"merge(feature1, feature2)\"\nInstead I guess you are proposing that for that use case we force the user to do: hg log -r \"merge('re:(feature1|feature2)')\n\nDid I understand you correctly?","author":"angel.ezquerra","id":"82291","dateCreated":"1547248200","dateModified":"1547248200"},{"type":"comment","comment":">   I think it would be a good idea to make the \"branch\" arguments more flexible. One option could be to use a stringmatcher to add support for regular expressions as you suggest. I can look into that. However there may be some other options worth exploring. The one you suggest is very interesting although I find the syntax a bit complicated for the common use cases that I want to enable which are:\n>   \n>   1. Ignore merges from the same branch, which in a named-branch based branching strategy are usually irrelevant\n>   2. Look into merges with a specific branch (e.g. which branches have been merged with the default branch)?\n>   \n>   In my experience those two are the ones that are the most common and I think we should try to make the easy to use. That is, I think that even if mercurial had a filter function like the one you propose I would still want to be able to express those 2 common merge properties in a simple way.\n\nYep, I agree with that.\n\n>   That being said, I really like your idea since I often find myself being unable to express what I want with a revset (as powerful as those are) because of the lack of a filtering mechanism. Adding a generic filter function would be very useful indeed. I'm not sure if the syntax you propose would work as is though. It seems that it would need a new \"&\" operator? In any case I believe that it is out of the scope of this particular set of patches. Do you agree?\n\nYes. Actually I have a PoC-level implementation of generic filtering predicate,\nwhich can be reviewed separately.\n\n> If so I can focus on improving this patch by adding the stringmatcher as you suggest (as it seems I'm not the only one who thinks this would be useful). Is that ok?\n\nSounds good to me. To be clear, I want `'withbranch'` instead of\n`'*withbranch'`, because the withbranch option doesn't look like a first-class\nparameter of the `merge()` predicate.","author":"yuja","id":"82036","dateCreated":"1547126177","dateModified":"1547126177"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D5495#81562, @yuja wrote:\n>> +@predicate('merge(*withbranch)', safe=True)\n>>  def merge(repo, subset, x):\n>> -    \"\"\"Changeset is a merge changeset.\n>> +    \"\"\"Changeset is a merge changeset\n>> +\n>> +    All merge revisions are returned by default. If one or more \"withbranch\"\n>> +    names are provided only merges with those branches (i.e. whose\n>> +    second parent belongs to one of those branches) will be returned.\n> \n> I understand this will be useful in a certain branch strategy, but the\n> proposed syntax is hardly extensible. Maybe it can be a non-wildcard argument\n> of `stringmatcher` type so we can at least add another option later.\n>\n> Any thoughts? Do anyone love this feature?\n> \n> If we had a syntax to filter revisions by sub expression, this and the\n> samebranch option could be expressed as follows:\n> \n> ```\n> merge() & filter($a, p2($a) & branch(\"...\"))\n> merge() & filter($a, samebranch(parents($a)))\n> \n> where filter(argname, boolean-expr)\n> ```\n> \n> This is much more expressive (or verbose) and can support other types of\n> branches, but is hard to implement.\n\nThank you for the review, @yuja \n\nI think it would be a good idea to make the \"branch\" arguments more flexible. One option could be to use a stringmatcher to add support for regular expressions as you suggest. I can look into that. However there may be some other options worth exploring. The one you suggest is very interesting although I find the syntax a bit complicated for the common use cases that I want to enable which are:\n\n1. Ignore merges from the same branch, which in a named-branch based branching strategy are usually irrelevant\n2. Look into merges with a specific branch (e.g. which branches have been merged with the default branch)?\n\nIn my experience those two are the ones that are the most common and I think we should try to make the easy to use. That is, I think that even if mercurial had a filter function like the one you propose I would still want to be able to express those 2 common merge properties in a simple way.\n\nThat being said, I really like your idea since I often find myself being unable to express what I want with a revset (as powerful as those are) because of the lack of a filtering mechanism. Adding a generic filter function would be very useful indeed. I'm not sure if the syntax you propose would work as is though. It seems that it would need a new \"&\" operator? In any case I believe that it is out of the scope of this particular set of patches. Do you agree? If so I can focus on improving this patch by adding the stringmatcher as you suggest (as it seems I'm not the only one who thinks this would be useful). Is that ok?\n","author":"angel.ezquerra","id":"81915","dateCreated":"1547076060","dateModified":"1547076060"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D5495#81562, @yuja wrote:\n>> +@predicate('merge(*withbranch)', safe=True)\n>>  def merge(repo, subset, x):\n>> -    \"\"\"Changeset is a merge changeset.\n>> +    \"\"\"Changeset is a merge changeset\n>> +\n>> +    All merge revisions are returned by default. If one or more \"withbranch\"\n>> +    names are provided only merges with those branches (i.e. whose\n>> +    second parent belongs to one of those branches) will be returned.\n> \n> I understand this will be useful in a certain branch strategy, but the\n> proposed syntax is hardly extensible. Maybe it can be a non-wildcard argument\n> of `stringmatcher` type so we can at least add another option later.\n> \n> Any thoughts? Do anyone love this feature?\n\nI like this feature as it will be quite useful for us. Also I like your filter() suggestion more than the syntax this series introduces.","author":"pulkit","id":"81688","dateCreated":"1546949106","dateModified":"1546949106"},{"type":"comment","comment":"> +@predicate('merge(*withbranch)', safe=True)\n>  def merge(repo, subset, x):\n> -    \"\"\"Changeset is a merge changeset.\n> +    \"\"\"Changeset is a merge changeset\n> +\n> +    All merge revisions are returned by default. If one or more \"withbranch\"\n> +    names are provided only merges with those branches (i.e. whose\n> +    second parent belongs to one of those branches) will be returned.\n\nI understand this will be useful in a certain branch strategy, but the\nproposed syntax is hardly extensible. Maybe it can be a non-wildcard argument\nof `stringmatcher` type so we can at least add another option later.\n\nAny thoughts? Do anyone love this feature?\n\nIf we had a syntax to filter revisions by sub expression, this and the\nsamebranch option could be expressed as follows:\n\n```\nmerge() & filter($a, p2($a) & branch(\"...\"))\nmerge() & filter($a, samebranch(parents($a)))\n\nwhere filter(argname, boolean-expr)\n```\n\nThis is much more expressive (or verbose) and can support other types of\nbranches, but is hard to implement.","author":"yuja","id":"81563","dateCreated":"1546870648","dateModified":"1546870648"},{"type":"update","diffId":"13017","author":"angel.ezquerra","id":"81355","dateCreated":"1546801405","dateModified":"1546801405"}],"dateCreated":"1546801405","dateModified":"1579887138","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"6029","callsign":"HG","title":"Bug 1477205 - Remove the exception when a node is created after closing the AudioContext. r?padenot","author":"vmillet","summary":"","testPlan":"","lineCount":"77","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["marmoute","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117582","dateCreated":"1579887136","dateModified":"1579887136"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117581","dateCreated":"1579887136","dateModified":"1579887136"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Hi Valentin,\n\nIt looks like you are not using the right Phabricator instance. This one is dedicated to the Mercurial projet, not Firefox.","author":"marmoute","id":"87950","dateCreated":"1551270268","dateModified":"1551270268"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14252","author":"vmillet","id":"87940","dateCreated":"1551264426","dateModified":"1551264426"}],"dateCreated":"1551264426","dateModified":"1579887137","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"6462","callsign":"HG","title":"commitextras: try to remove localrepo hacking to add extras to commit","author":"pulkit","summary":"","testPlan":"","lineCount":"59","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["martinvonz","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117579","dateCreated":"1579887135","dateModified":"1579887135"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117578","dateCreated":"1579887135","dateModified":"1579887135"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Can you elaborate a bit about what the current hack does and why it's bad?","author":"martinvonz","id":"94006","dateCreated":"1559597555","dateModified":"1559597555"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I am not sure this is good way to do this. But I will definitely like to remove the hacking around localrepo to add extras to a commit.","author":"pulkit","id":"93869","dateCreated":"1559240493","dateModified":"1559240510"},{"type":"update","diffId":"15302","author":"pulkit","id":"93865","dateCreated":"1559240451","dateModified":"1559240451"}],"dateCreated":"1559240451","dateModified":"1579887135","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"6359","callsign":"HG","title":"test: change test's diff generation to use mdiff for nicer output","author":"sangeet259","summary":"This is patch (2\/2), hence must be there in the repo after 1\/2, which is at https:\/\/phab.mercurial-scm.org\/D6356\n\nThe current diff being used by tests upon failing is not very good. Sometimes there is a lot of redundancy.\n\nTo see for yourself, follow these steps:\n\n1. Download this bundle : http:\/\/bit.ly\/2IDgJFU\n\n```\n$ hg clone https:\/\/www.mercurial-scm.org\/hg\n$ cd hg\/\n$ hg unbundle af8efb83e1d6.hg\n$ hg up a1e70c1dbec0^\n$ g revert --all --rev a1e70c1dbec0\n$ hg revert -i tests\/test-bookmarks-pushpull.t # revert only the last three hunks (press 'n' for the first 8, and 'y' for the last three)\n$ cd tests\n$ hg diff --rev a1e70c1dbec0 # nice output from Mercurial\n$ .\/run-test.py test-bookmarks-pushpull.t # poor output from the test runner\n```\n\nIf you couldn't follow those steps, you can simply check the diffs here:\n\n* test's diff:\n\n```\n\n> --- \/media\/sangeet\/Stuff\/hgrepo\/Octobus\/MD4\/tests\/test-bookmarks-pushpull.t\n> +++ \/media\/sangeet\/Stuff\/hgrepo\/Octobus\/MD4\/tests\/test-bookmarks-pushpull.t.b2-binary.err\n> @@ -1086,8 +1086,7 @@\n>    pushing to $TESTTMP\/issue4455-dest (glob)\n>    searching for changes\n>    no changes found\n> -  pushkey-abort: prepushkey hook exited with status 1\n> -  abort: exporting bookmark @ failed!\n> +  abort: prepushkey hook exited with status 1\n>    [255]\n\n>  #endif\n> @@ -1126,27 +1125,27 @@\n>    pushing to ssh:\/\/user@dummy\/issue4455-dest\n>    searching for changes\n>    no changes found\n> +  remote: prepushkey hook exited with status 1\n> +  abort: push failed on remote\n> +  [255]\n> +\n> +#endif\n> +\n> +  $ hg -R ..\/issue4455-dest\/ bookmarks\n> +  no bookmarks set\n> +\n> +Using http\n> +----------\n> +\n> +#if b2-pushkey\n> +  $ hg push -B @ http # bundle2+\n> +  pushing to http:\/\/localhost:$HGPORT\/\n> +  searching for changes\n> +  no changes found\n>    remote: pushkey-abort: prepushkey hook exited with status 1\n>    abort: exporting bookmark @ failed!\n>    [255]\n>\n> -#endif\n> -\n> -  $ hg -R ..\/issue4455-dest\/ bookmarks\n> -  no bookmarks set\n> -\n> -Using http\n> -----------\n> -\n> -#if b2-pushkey\n> -  $ hg push -B @ http # bundle2+\n> -  pushing to http:\/\/localhost:$HGPORT\/\n> -  searching for changes\n> -  no changes found\n> -  remote: pushkey-abort: prepushkey hook exited with status 1\n> -  abort: exporting bookmark @ failed!\n> -  [255]\n> -\n>    $ hg -R ..\/issue4455-dest\/ bookmarks\n>    no bookmarks set\n>\n> @@ -1166,8 +1165,8 @@\n>    pushing to ssh:\/\/user@dummy\/issue4455-dest\n>    searching for changes\n>    no changes found\n> -  remote: pushkey-abort: prepushkey hook exited with status 1\n> -  abort: exporting bookmark @ failed!\n> +  remote: prepushkey hook exited with status 1\n> +  abort: push failed on remote\n>    [255]\n>\n>  #endif\n>\n> ERROR: test-bookmarks-pushpull.t (case b2-binary) output changed\n> !.\n> Failed test-bookmarks-pushpull.t (case b2-binary): output changed\n> # Ran 2 tests, 0 skipped, 1 failed.\n> python hash seed: 133193196\n> ```\n---\n\n* diff used by hg diff:\n\n```\n> diff -r a1e70c1dbec0 tests\/test-bookmarks-pushpull.t\n> --- a\/tests\/test-bookmarks-pushpull.t\tThu Nov 01 22:20:00 2018 +0530\n> +++ b\/tests\/test-bookmarks-pushpull.t\tTue Oct 17 12:38:13 2017 +0200\n> @@ -1086,8 +1086,7 @@\n>    pushing to $TESTTMP\/issue4455-dest (glob)\n>    searching for changes\n>    no changes found\n> -  pushkey-abort: prepushkey hook exited with status 1\n> -  abort: exporting bookmark @ failed!\n> +  abort: prepushkey hook exited with status 1\n>    [255]\n>\n>  #endif\n> @@ -1126,8 +1125,8 @@\n>    pushing to ssh:\/\/user@dummy\/issue4455-dest\n>    searching for changes\n>    no changes found\n> -  remote: pushkey-abort: prepushkey hook exited with status 1\n> -  abort: exporting bookmark @ failed!\n> +  remote: prepushkey hook exited with status 1\n> +  abort: push failed on remote\n>    [255]\n>\n>  #endif\n> @@ -1166,8 +1165,8 @@\n>    pushing to ssh:\/\/user@dummy\/issue4455-dest\n>    searching for changes\n>    no changes found\n> -  remote: pushkey-abort: prepushkey hook exited with status 1\n> -  abort: exporting bookmark @ failed!\n> +  remote: prepushkey hook exited with status 1\n> +  abort: push failed on remote\n>    [255]\n>\n>  #endif\n```\n\nTests uses _unified_diff based on difflib.py . The output isn't great!\n\nMercurial's diff uses mdiff which gives better diffs.\nThis patch uses mdiff's unidiff function to generate the diff for the failed tests.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"527","dependsOn":["6356"],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["pulkit","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117576","dateCreated":"1579887134","dateModified":"1579887134"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117575","dateCreated":"1579887134","dateModified":"1579887134"},{"type":"comment","comment":"@pulkit \n\n> The commit message has diff which confuses `hg import`.  You need to indent those diffs.\n\u2705 \n> Also, remove the pastebin links as they are not required since we have diffs.\n\u2705 \n>> Download this bundle : http:\/\/bit.ly\/2DuJjsS\n> \n> This link asks me to login. So definitely not a good link to put in commit message.\n\u2705  \n","author":"sangeet259","id":"94602","dateCreated":"1560200514","dateModified":"1560200514"},{"type":"update","diffId":"15433","author":"sangeet259","id":"94600","dateCreated":"1560200157","dateModified":"1560200157"},{"type":"comment","comment":"The commit message has diff which confuses `hg import`.  You need to indent those diffs.\n\nAlso, remove the pastebin links as they are not required since we have diffs.\n\n> Download this bundle : http:\/\/bit.ly\/2DuJjsS\n\nThis link asks me to login. So definitely not a good link to put in commit message.","author":"pulkit","id":"92736","dateCreated":"1557936451","dateModified":"1557936451"},{"type":"update","diffId":"15052","author":"sangeet259","id":"92475","dateCreated":"1557523020","dateModified":"1557523020"}],"dateCreated":"1557523020","dateModified":"1579887134","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"6356","callsign":"HG","title":"mdiff: prepare mdiff to be used for run-tests to replace unidiff","author":"sangeet259","summary":"Patch 1\/2\n\nThis patch adds some functions to mdiff.py that will be called from run-tests.py\nwhich will be added in the second part of this patch series.\n\nThe future changes to run-tests.py will enable one to use mdiif\nto diff rather than unidiff whenever the mercurial is installed in the system.\n\nhg diff uses mdiff which which gives simpler and more readable diffs than unidiff\n\nWhy do I need to split the patches into two ?\nThe reason to split what would have been a single patch into two is because\nfor the next patch to be able to use the mdiff during tests,\nthis revision has to be there in the system's mercurial installation.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"36","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["durin42","pulkit","martinvonz","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117573","dateCreated":"1579887132","dateModified":"1579887132"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117572","dateCreated":"1579887132","dateModified":"1579887132"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6356#94599, @sangeet259 wrote:\n> @pulkit \n>> My understanding is that the 1st patch should be present in the mercurial installed in the system, which is what you said right? If that's correct, we can go ahead and have this whole as one patch as I don't think people usually do install system hg on patch to patch basis.\n> \n> Yes, that is what I was trying to say.\n> But apart from that, I see the two changes as doing two logically separable things, to deserve to be broken into two commits.\n> \n> Is that justified?\n\nTo be honest, the motivation behind this patch is the next patch. It will be nice to have them as one patch, so that when in future someone does annotate, they can see the whole functionality in one patch. But I fine with accepting as separate patches too.\n\nAlso, this patch still has some un-addressed comments incase you missed them.","author":"pulkit","id":"94610","dateCreated":"1560206469","dateModified":"1560206469"},{"type":"comment","comment":"@pulkit \n> My understanding is that the 1st patch should be present in the mercurial installed in the system, which is what you said right? If that's correct, we can go ahead and have this whole as one patch as I don't think people usually do install system hg on patch to patch basis.\n\nYes, that is what I was trying to say.\nBut apart from that, I see the two changes as doing two logically separable things, to deserve to be broken into two commits.\n\nIs that justified?","author":"sangeet259","id":"94599","dateCreated":"1560199497","dateModified":"1560199497"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6356#92695, @sangeet259 wrote:\n>>>! In D6356#92644, @pulkit wrote:\n>>> Why do I need to split the patches into two ?\n>>> The reason to split what would have been a single patch into two is because\n>>> for the next patch to be able to use the mdiff during tests,\n>>> this revision has to be there in the system's mercurial installation.\n>> \n>> I didn't get the last line. Can you explain more?\n>> \n>> I think both can be folded in one and should be good.\n> \n> @pulkit \n> Well the next patch imports mercurial and then calls `mdff.new_diff` . If I combine those two patches then you can not see the change as while testing D6359 , if there `mdiff` doesn't already have new_diff \n> it will always fall back to unified_diff as happened with @durin42  , while he was trying to see the alternate path as he trying to test D5514 .\n> \n> What I am trying to do here is, once D6356 is has added `new_diff` to `mdiff`, you can then have this revision installed in your system or wherever one tests this, and then check D6359 to see the alternate path it follows.\n\nI was trying to test it and unable to get this to work both with a single patch and two splitted patches.\n\nMy understanding is that the 1st patch should be present in the mercurial installed in the system, which is what you said right? If that's correct, we can go ahead and have this whole as one patch as I don't think people usually do install system hg on patch to patch basis.\n","author":"pulkit","id":"92737","dateCreated":"1557937290","dateModified":"1557937290"},{"type":"inline","comment":"nit: `return itertools.chain.from_iterable(hunklines)`","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"552","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/mdiff.py","diffId":"15049","author":"pulkit","id":"92734","dateCreated":"1557936004","dateModified":"1557936004"},{"type":"inline","comment":"may be worth to rename it to `prepare_mdiff_input`.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"531","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/mdiff.py","diffId":"15049","author":"pulkit","id":"92733","dateCreated":"1557936004","dateModified":"1557936004"},{"type":"inline","comment":"We can do\n```\ndate = datetime.datetime.now().strftime(\"%a %b %d %y %H:%M:%S %Y %z\")\nreturn \"\".join(expected), date, \"\".join(output), date, diffopts(noprefix=True)\n```","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"540","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/mdiff.py","diffId":"15049","author":"pulkit","id":"92732","dateCreated":"1557936004","dateModified":"1557936004"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I was unable to find any `getdiff` in this file.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"544","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/mdiff.py","diffId":"15049","author":"pulkit","id":"92731","dateCreated":"1557936004","dateModified":"1557936004"},{"type":"inline","comment":"nit: `return process_mdiff(uheaders, hunks)`","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"562","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/mdiff.py","diffId":"15049","author":"pulkit","id":"92730","dateCreated":"1557936004","dateModified":"1557936004"},{"type":"inline","comment":"backwards compatibility with what?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"557","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/mdiff.py","diffId":"15049","author":"pulkit","id":"92729","dateCreated":"1557936004","dateModified":"1557936004"},{"type":"comment","comment":"> Patch 1\/2\n\nwe don't add that to commit messages.","author":"pulkit","id":"92728","dateCreated":"1557936004","dateModified":"1557936004"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6356#92644, @pulkit wrote:\n>> Why do I need to split the patches into two ?\n>> The reason to split what would have been a single patch into two is because\n>> for the next patch to be able to use the mdiff during tests,\n>> this revision has to be there in the system's mercurial installation.\n> \n> I didn't get the last line. Can you explain more?\n> \n> I think both can be folded in one and should be good.\n\n@pulkit \nWell the next patch imports mercurial and then calls `mdff.new_diff` . If I combine those two patches then you can not see the change as while testing D6359 , if there `mdiff` doesn't already have new_diff \nit will always fall back to unified_diff as happened with @durin42  , while he was trying to see the alternate path as he trying to test D5514 .\n\nWhat I am trying to do here is, once D6356 is has added `new_diff` to `mdiff`, you can then have this revision installed in your system or wherever one tests this, and then check D6359 to see the alternate path it follows.","author":"sangeet259","id":"92697","dateCreated":"1557907221","dateModified":"1557907221"},{"type":"comment","comment":"> Why do I need to split the patches into two ?\n> The reason to split what would have been a single patch into two is because\n> for the next patch to be able to use the mdiff during tests,\n> this revision has to be there in the system's mercurial installation.\n\nI didn't get the last line. Can you explain more?\n\nI think both can be folded in one and should be good.","author":"pulkit","id":"92645","dateCreated":"1557853675","dateModified":"1557853675"},{"type":"comment","comment":"> Oh, nice! I sometimes use run-tests.py -i and just accept an unreadable diff because I know that hg diff might make it easier to read. I had not understood why :) \nGlad to know you will be helped :)\n\nAdded some description to the commit message!","author":"sangeet259","id":"92456","dateCreated":"1557512190","dateModified":"1557512190"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6356#92453, @sangeet259 wrote:\n>>>! In D6356#92451, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>> The future changes to run-tests.py will enable one to use mdiif\n>>> to diff rather than unidiff whenever the mercurial is installed in the system.\n>> \n>> Perhaps a naive question, but why is that desirable? How will I (as someone running tests) notice?\n> \n> @martinvonz \n> This patch is a breakdown of the earlier patch https:\/\/phab.mercurial-scm.org\/D5514\n\nOh, nice! I sometimes use `run-tests.py -i` and just accept an unreadable diff because I know that `hg diff` might make it easier to read. I had not understood why :)\n\n> \n> \n> [[ https:\/\/phab.mercurial-scm.org\/D5514 | There ]] I have detailed why is this required.\n> In short, the diff output of tests is a bit ugly compared to what hg diff does, which is much nicer.\n> \n> \n> \n> I am thinking of putting that descriptive commit message in the patch 2\/2.\n\nPerhaps also adding a \"which gives simpler diffs\" or something like that to this patch?","author":"martinvonz","id":"92454","dateCreated":"1557510262","dateModified":"1557510262"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6356#92451, @martinvonz wrote:\n>> The future changes to run-tests.py will enable one to use mdiif\n>> to diff rather than unidiff whenever the mercurial is installed in the system.\n> \n> Perhaps a naive question, but why is that desirable? How will I (as someone running tests) notice?\n\n@martinvonz \nThis patch is a breakdown of the earlier patch https:\/\/phab.mercurial-scm.org\/D5514\n\n\n[[ https:\/\/phab.mercurial-scm.org\/D5514 | There ]] I have detailed why is this required.\nIn short, the diff output of tests is a bit ugly compared to what hg diff does, which is much nicer.\n\n\n\nI am thinking of putting that descriptive commit message in the patch 2\/2.\n\n\n","author":"sangeet259","id":"92453","dateCreated":"1557510056","dateModified":"1557510056"},{"type":"comment","comment":"> The future changes to run-tests.py will enable one to use mdiif\n> to diff rather than unidiff whenever the mercurial is installed in the system.\n\nPerhaps a naive question, but why is that desirable? How will I (as someone running tests) notice?","author":"martinvonz","id":"92452","dateCreated":"1557509673","dateModified":"1557509673"},{"type":"update","diffId":"15049","author":"sangeet259","id":"92446","dateCreated":"1557509283","dateModified":"1557509283"}],"dateCreated":"1557509283","dateModified":"1579887133","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"6082","callsign":"HG","title":"phabricator: add a `--branch` flag to `hg phabsend`","author":"pulkit","summary":"One of the existing problems with using phabricator for us is that there is no\nway to specify that the revision\/patch\/differential is intended for stable\nbranch.\n\nThis patch adds a new flag `--branch` to `hg phabsend` command. If the\n`--branch` is passed, `hg phabsend` will add a comment to the related\ndifferential saying that `The review is intended for a <branch-name> branch`.\n\nI looked into other API's which we can use or other properties which can be used\nto put the branch info and didn't found anything quite useful.\n\nFuture improvement can be checking the branch of the patch and commenting that\nbranch name.\n\nI am not sure how to add tests for this. I tested this patch while sending this\npatch.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"20","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["durin42","indygreg","Kwan","mharbison72","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117570","dateCreated":"1579887131","dateModified":"1579887131"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117569","dateCreated":"1579887131","dateModified":"1579887131"},{"type":"comment","comment":"FYI: I've updated our phabricator recently, so maybe it's worth revisiting the branch-name-in-phab functionality from this patch?","author":"durin42","id":"94750","dateCreated":"1560355915","dateModified":"1560355915"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6082#89656, @pulkit wrote:\n>>>! In D6082#88981, @Kwan wrote:\n>>>>! In D6082#88852, @mharbison72 wrote:\n>>>>>! In D6082#88851, @pulkit wrote:\n>>>> @mharbison72 thanks for tips on adding test. Will add tests in next iteration.\n>>>> \n>>>> I found that Differentials do have a branch field, maybe we can use that? https:\/\/secure.phabricator.com\/source\/phabricator\/browse\/master\/src\/applications\/differential\/customfield\/DifferentialBranchField.php\n>>> \n>>> Seems worth a shot.  I don\u2019t know anything about it, but presumably this would be rendered specially in the web UI, like the test plan, etc.  That sounds better than as a follow up comment.  It also seems natural enough that maybe it can be done unconditionally, instead of needing the argument.\n>> \n>> Yeah, it shows in the Diff Detail pane, [like here](https:\/\/phabricator-dev.allizom.org\/D1092?id=1765).  Unfortunately I think it can be only set when using the creatediff endpoint, which is what I had to change my fork to do (though I could be wrong, the conduit docs are too sparse to be sure).\n> \n> Last night I tried different endpoints and looks like creatediff is the only one which can be used to set the branch. I have asked on their discourse https:\/\/discourse.phabricator-community.org\/t\/conduit-api-to-set-branch-of-a-differential\/2521.\n> \n> Talking about creatediff, can it be used instead of createrawdiff? It it's possible can you paste the changes you did your fork, maybe we need the exact same changes.\n\nOh man, yeah sure, let me just commit the WIP and push.  It's a lot of extra code to wrangle the data into creatediff form.  Bear in mind this wasn't exactly ready to have other eyes on it, and it's possible not all the changes are actually necessary (particularly the urlencoding ones, _so_ much fun having [multiple different ways](https:\/\/secure.phabricator.com\/T12447#216803) to submit the same data to Conduit :\/). I also have not downstreamed all my py3 compat changes yet.\nFrankly I thought this amount of extra code probably wouldn't fly for submitting to the official version (and my coding style is probably questionable).\n\nOn the plus side this did let me [successfully submit](https:\/\/phabricator.services.mozilla.com\/D23114?id=76558) binary file changes to mozilla-central.\n\n[In all its \"glory\"](https:\/\/bitbucket.org\/KwanEsq\/phabsend-moz\/commits\/branch\/beta)\n\nI've also started to write up what I've learnt about the API for the wiki there, to document things the official docs are silent on, like what the \"changes\" parameter to the creatediff endpoint is actually supposed to be.  Hopefully that'd help anyone else who wanted to use such APIs in future (or who even wanted to make changes to mine).\n","author":"Kwan","id":"89707","dateCreated":"1552998145","dateModified":"1552998191"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6082#88981, @Kwan wrote:\n>>>! In D6082#88852, @mharbison72 wrote:\n>>>>! In D6082#88851, @pulkit wrote:\n>>> @mharbison72 thanks for tips on adding test. Will add tests in next iteration.\n>>> \n>>> I found that Differentials do have a branch field, maybe we can use that? https:\/\/secure.phabricator.com\/source\/phabricator\/browse\/master\/src\/applications\/differential\/customfield\/DifferentialBranchField.php\n>> \n>> Seems worth a shot.  I don\u2019t know anything about it, but presumably this would be rendered specially in the web UI, like the test plan, etc.  That sounds better than as a follow up comment.  It also seems natural enough that maybe it can be done unconditionally, instead of needing the argument.\n> \n> Yeah, it shows in the Diff Detail pane, [like here](https:\/\/phabricator-dev.allizom.org\/D1092?id=1765).  Unfortunately I think it can be only set when using the creatediff endpoint, which is what I had to change my fork to do (though I could be wrong, the conduit docs are too sparse to be sure).\n\nLast night I tried different endpoints and looks like creatediff is the only one which can be used to set the branch. I have asked on their discourse https:\/\/discourse.phabricator-community.org\/t\/conduit-api-to-set-branch-of-a-differential\/2521.\n\nTalking about creatediff, can it be used instead of createrawdiff? It it's possible can you paste the changes you did your fork, maybe we need the exact same changes.\n\n>>! In D6082#89250, @indygreg wrote:\n> While there may be a need for an explicit `--branch` argument, should we start by having `hg phabsend` automatically pick up the branch from the changeset? i.e. wouldn't we want branch selection to be automatic?\n\nYes I agree. The next version of this patch will make `hg phabsend` automatically pick up the branch from changeset.","author":"pulkit","id":"89656","dateCreated":"1552994691","dateModified":"1552994691"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14548","author":"pulkit","id":"89639","dateCreated":"1552943259","dateModified":"1552943259"},{"type":"comment","comment":"While there may be a need for an explicit `--branch` argument, should we start by having `hg phabsend` automatically pick up the branch from the changeset? i.e. wouldn't we want branch selection to be automatic?","author":"indygreg","id":"89251","dateCreated":"1552502219","dateModified":"1552502219"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6082#88981, @Kwan wrote:\n>>>! In D6082#88852, @mharbison72 wrote:\n>>>>! In D6082#88851, @pulkit wrote:\n>>> @mharbison72 thanks for tips on adding test. Will add tests in next iteration.\n>>> \n>>> I found that Differentials do have a branch field, maybe we can use that? https:\/\/secure.phabricator.com\/source\/phabricator\/browse\/master\/src\/applications\/differential\/customfield\/DifferentialBranchField.php\n>> \n>> Seems worth a shot.  I don\u2019t know anything about it, but presumably this would be rendered specially in the web UI, like the test plan, etc.  That sounds better than as a follow up comment.  It also seems natural enough that maybe it can be done unconditionally, instead of needing the argument.\n> \n> Yeah, it shows in the Diff Detail pane, [like here](https:\/\/phabricator-dev.allizom.org\/D1092?id=1765).  Unfortunately I think it can be only set when using the creatediff endpoint, which is what I had to change my fork to do (though I could be wrong, the conduit docs are too sparse to be sure).\n\nYeah, that's kinda how I read the documentation too :\/\n\nI wonder if we can use `parents.set` in `differential.revision.edit` on the first commit in the series.  Or add the branch name to the existing metadata wiith `differential.setdiffproperty`?  I've aliased `phabimport` to `!\"%HG%\" phabread $1 --stack | \"%HG%\" import --bypass -`, but maybe a first class phabimport that knows how to use the data would make the tooling easier?","author":"mharbison72","id":"88983","dateCreated":"1552156019","dateModified":"1552156019"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6082#88852, @mharbison72 wrote:\n>>>! In D6082#88851, @pulkit wrote:\n>> @mharbison72 thanks for tips on adding test. Will add tests in next iteration.\n>> \n>> I found that Differentials do have a branch field, maybe we can use that? https:\/\/secure.phabricator.com\/source\/phabricator\/browse\/master\/src\/applications\/differential\/customfield\/DifferentialBranchField.php\n> \n> Seems worth a shot.  I don\u2019t know anything about it, but presumably this would be rendered specially in the web UI, like the test plan, etc.  That sounds better than as a follow up comment.  It also seems natural enough that maybe it can be done unconditionally, instead of needing the argument.\n\nYeah, it shows in the Diff Detail pane, [like here](https:\/\/phabricator-dev.allizom.org\/D1092?id=1765).  Unfortunately I think it can be only set when using the creatediff endpoint, which is what I had to change my fork to do (though I could be wrong, the conduit docs are too sparse to be sure).","author":"Kwan","id":"88982","dateCreated":"1552150082","dateModified":"1552150082"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6082#88851, @pulkit wrote:\n> @mharbison72 thanks for tips on adding test. Will add tests in next iteration.\n> \n> I found that Differentials do have a branch field, maybe we can use that? https:\/\/secure.phabricator.com\/source\/phabricator\/browse\/master\/src\/applications\/differential\/customfield\/DifferentialBranchField.php\n\nSeems worth a shot.  I don\u2019t know anything about it, but presumably this would be rendered specially in the web UI, like the test plan, etc.  That sounds better than as a follow up comment.  It also seems natural enough that maybe it can be done unconditionally, instead of needing the argument.","author":"mharbison72","id":"88852","dateCreated":"1552086746","dateModified":"1552086746"},{"type":"comment","comment":"@mharbison72 thanks for tips on adding test. Will add tests in next iteration.\n\nI found that Differentials do have a branch field, maybe we can use that? https:\/\/secure.phabricator.com\/source\/phabricator\/browse\/master\/src\/applications\/differential\/customfield\/DifferentialBranchField.php","author":"pulkit","id":"88851","dateCreated":"1552084239","dateModified":"1552084239"},{"type":"comment","comment":"To create a test, you need to `pip install pytest-vcr`, edit `auth.hgphab.phabtoken` at the top of the test, and use `--test-vcr` with your `hg phabsend` command.  See a641fd1a1196 for some background, and remember to purge your phabtoken from the changes before posting.  FWIW, I used a VirtualBox VM running Phabricator from Bitnami to figure things out before generating the test on phab.m-s.o to avoid extra noise.","author":"mharbison72","id":"88621","dateCreated":"1551980125","dateModified":"1551980125"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This review is intended for `default` branch.","author":"pulkit","id":"88617","dateCreated":"1551967198","dateModified":"1551967198"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14384","author":"pulkit","id":"88612","dateCreated":"1551967197","dateModified":"1551967197"}],"dateCreated":"1551967197","dateModified":"1579887131","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"6056","callsign":"HG","title":"patch: stop aborting when add\/rename\/copy files on --interactive (issue5727)","author":"navaneeth.suresh","summary":"issue5727 was reported specifically for mq on using qrefresh. On investigating further,\nI realized that it was a check in `patch.py` that resulting in the abort. I may be wrong.\nOn interactive mode, `gp.mode` was not `None`. I added a check in `_applydiff()` not to\nabort when `gp.mode` is `None` or `ui.interactive` is `True`.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"21","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["durin42","pulkit","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117567","dateCreated":"1579887130","dateModified":"1579887130"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117566","dateCreated":"1579887130","dateModified":"1579887130"},{"type":"comment","comment":"This patch breaks `test-split.t` - could you take a look?","author":"durin42","id":"94760","dateCreated":"1560357642","dateModified":"1560357642"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Gentle ping for review.","author":"navaneeth.suresh","id":"89905","dateCreated":"1553450928","dateModified":"1553450928"},{"type":"inline","comment":"IIUC, the current scenario is running into `abort: cannot create foo.h: destination already exists` if an empty file has been added. This means that the test case in my previous comment works fine without running into an error. I tested with hg (version 4.9+3-b70b7c585ee9) by adding a file with contents by running one command after another in my command line and got the same output. The interactive UI prompted me with only two queries. For an empty file, it should be only one as there are no changes to record. This might be the case for `qrefresh`. I'm not sure about this though.","replyTo":"89525","isNewFile":"1","line":"570","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-mq-qrefresh.t","diffId":"14492","author":"navaneeth.suresh","id":"89558","dateCreated":"1552798795","dateModified":"1552798795"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I don't see the output which asks for `record this change to foo.h`  here in the test.","replyTo":"89500","isNewFile":"1","line":"570","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-mq-qrefresh.t","diffId":"14492","author":"pulkit","id":"89525","dateCreated":"1552777310","dateModified":"1552777310"},{"type":"inline","comment":"i think that's usual here as the file `foo.h` is empty. i have the following case running successfully with this patch:\n```\n  $ echo foo > foo.h\n  $ hg add foo.h\n  $ hg qrefresh -i --config ui.interactive=true <<EOF\n  > y\n  > y\n  > n\n  > EOF\n  diff --git a\/foo.h b\/foo.h\n  new file mode 100644\n  examine changes to 'foo.h'? [Ynesfdaq?] y\n  \n  @@ -0,0 +1,1 @@\n  +foo\n  record this change to 'foo.h'? [Ynesfdaq?] y\n```","replyTo":"89407","isNewFile":"1","line":"570","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-mq-qrefresh.t","diffId":"14492","author":"navaneeth.suresh","id":"89500","dateCreated":"1552726626","dateModified":"1552726626"},{"type":"inline","comment":"does this prompt ended here? it didn't show changes in 'foo.h'?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"570","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-mq-qrefresh.t","diffId":"14492","author":"pulkit","id":"89407","dateCreated":"1552657178","dateModified":"1552657178"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14492","author":"navaneeth.suresh","id":"89302","dateCreated":"1552544470","dateModified":"1552544470"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14319","author":"navaneeth.suresh","id":"88269","dateCreated":"1551641057","dateModified":"1551641057"}],"dateCreated":"1551641057","dateModified":"1579887130","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"6717","callsign":"HG","title":"mypy: add a mypy.ini config file","author":"indygreg","summary":"Static analysis is good. Let's encourage its use by adding\na mypy.ini config file to the repo that has reasonable defaults.\n\nWith this file in place, `mypy` appears to \"just work\" out of\nthe box. It yields a ton of errors and warnings though. But\nit's a start!","testPlan":"","lineCount":"29","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["durin42","pulkit","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117564","dateCreated":"1579887129","dateModified":"1579887129"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117563","dateCreated":"1579887129","dateModified":"1579887129"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Did you run tests on this patch? IIRC there's a test that'll fail ;)","author":"durin42","id":"98598","dateCreated":"1565810586","dateModified":"1565810586"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I am +1 on this. If I don't hear any objection on it until next week, I will queue it. Thanks for doing this work!","author":"pulkit","id":"98470","dateCreated":"1565216414","dateModified":"1565216414"},{"type":"update","diffId":"16126","author":"indygreg","id":"98291","dateCreated":"1564948379","dateModified":"1564948379"}],"dateCreated":"1564948379","dateModified":"1579887129","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"6739","callsign":"HG","title":"unshelve: add abort on using --interactive and --unresolved together","author":"navaneeth.suresh","summary":"It seems not to be a good idea to partially unshelve a mergestate. So,\nlet us abort on using `--interactive` and `--unresolved` together.`","testPlan":"","lineCount":"7","dependsOn":["6738"],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117561","dateCreated":"1579887127","dateModified":"1579887127"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117560","dateCreated":"1579887127","dateModified":"1579887127"},{"type":"update","diffId":"16255","author":"navaneeth.suresh","id":"98897","dateCreated":"1566074375","dateModified":"1566074375"}],"dateCreated":"1566074375","dateModified":"1579887128","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"6718","callsign":"HG","title":"repository: suppress typing errors on functions without arguments","author":"indygreg","summary":"zope.interface uses class magic to define interfaces. Mypy doesn't\nlike the methods without arguments and raises a warning for the\ndozens of them in repository.py.\n\nThis commit adds type annotation comments to silence the error.\nTBH I'm not sure if this is the best way to do this. But it does\nget the job done. We may have to revisit once we add proper type\nannotations to this file. For now, it makes mypy's output far\nless verbose.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"138","dependsOn":["6717"],"reviewers":["durin42","baymax"],"ccs":["pulkit","durin42","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117558","dateCreated":"1579887126","dateModified":"1579887126"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117557","dateCreated":"1579887126","dateModified":"1579887126"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I tried to queue but `test-check-code.t` and `test-check-commit.t` fails.","author":"pulkit","id":"99059","dateCreated":"1566317949","dateModified":"1566317949"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Seems fine, but probably file a bug against mypy on this.","author":"durin42","id":"98601","dateCreated":"1565810624","dateModified":"1565810624"},{"type":"accept","author":"durin42","id":"98600","dateCreated":"1565810624","dateModified":"1565810624"},{"type":"update","diffId":"16127","author":"indygreg","id":"98297","dateCreated":"1564948380","dateModified":"1564948380"}],"dateCreated":"1564948380","dateModified":"1579887126","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"6005","callsign":"HG","title":"uncommit: added interactive mode -i(issue6062)","author":"taapas1128","summary":"This adds interactive option to uncommit . Part of this code has been\nimported from evolve from commit hash `da2fdaa3d97c`. The basic\nfunctionality of the code lies in `_interactiveuncommit()`. It first uncommits\neverything then performs action similar to interactive amend .\n\nThe current implementation is not perfect and might result in `Hunk Failed`.\nat some point.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"1094","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["ryanmce","spectral","pulkit","martinvonz","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117555","dateCreated":"1579887124","dateModified":"1579887124"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117554","dateCreated":"1579887124","dateModified":"1579887124"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14558","author":"taapas1128","id":"89708","dateCreated":"1553000469","dateModified":"1553000469"},{"type":"inline","comment":"uncommitting instead of recording","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"1053","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/patch.py","diffId":"14547","author":"pulkit","id":"89706","dateCreated":"1552995408","dateModified":"1552995408"},{"type":"inline","comment":"here also, uncommit instead of record.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"1052","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/patch.py","diffId":"14547","author":"pulkit","id":"89705","dateCreated":"1552995408","dateModified":"1552995408"},{"type":"inline","comment":"`uncommit` instead of `record` here too.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"1050","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/patch.py","diffId":"14547","author":"pulkit","id":"89704","dateCreated":"1552995408","dateModified":"1552995408"},{"type":"inline","comment":"this should be `uncommit this change` right?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"1046","lineLength":"0","path":"mercurial\/patch.py","diffId":"14547","author":"pulkit","id":"89703","dateCreated":"1552995408","dateModified":"1552995408"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14547","author":"taapas1128","id":"89637","dateCreated":"1552934250","dateModified":"1552934250"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14546","author":"taapas1128","id":"89634","dateCreated":"1552932468","dateModified":"1552932468"},{"type":"inline","comment":"This operation thing can be used to show `select hunks to uncommit` message.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"258","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14521","author":"pulkit","id":"89633","dateCreated":"1552929443","dateModified":"1552929443"},{"type":"inline","comment":"okay sure.","replyTo":"89514","isNewFile":"1","line":"253","lineLength":"1","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14464","author":"taapas1128","id":"89521","dateCreated":"1552751527","dateModified":"1552751527"},{"type":"inline","comment":"yes I applied your patch and I m trying to figure out what is going wrong . I will send a fix soon.","replyTo":"89515","isNewFile":"1","line":"241","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14493","author":"taapas1128","id":"89520","dateCreated":"1552751527","dateModified":"1552751527"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Yes, please try to fix it. Did you try?","replyTo":"89507","isNewFile":"1","line":"241","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14493","author":"martinvonz","id":"89515","dateCreated":"1552745888","dateModified":"1552745888"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I suggested addressing the todo now instead of waiting.","replyTo":"89508","isNewFile":"1","line":"253","lineLength":"1","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14464","author":"martinvonz","id":"89514","dateCreated":"1552745888","dateModified":"1552745888"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I am a little puzzled about what is to be done here . the TODO states that operations are currently not wrapped . how do you want me to continue ?","replyTo":"89463","isNewFile":"1","line":"253","lineLength":"1","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14464","author":"taapas1128","id":"89508","dateCreated":"1552731138","dateModified":"1552731138"},{"type":"inline","comment":"do you want me to remove the temporary commit part in this patch or a follow up of this because that will require fixing it up for added files.","replyTo":"89468","isNewFile":"1","line":"241","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14493","author":"taapas1128","id":"89507","dateCreated":"1552731138","dateModified":"1552731138"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14521","author":"taapas1128","id":"89504","dateCreated":"1552728980","dateModified":"1552728980"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14520","author":"taapas1128","id":"89501","dateCreated":"1552728260","dateModified":"1552728260"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Do we need to create the temporary commit? I found it hard to reason about (the temporary commit contains the changes that should be removed, which confused me) and we should ideally not leave that commit in the repo. I tried to rewrite it to not write the temporary commit. You can see my patch at http:\/\/paste.debian.net\/1073278\/. As you can see in the changed test case there, it doesn't work with added files. I don't know if that's because of the crecord bug that you mention on line 254 of this version or something else. Hopefully the patch is still a good start and maybe you can fix that bug. It would be great if you can even fix it in crecord (if that's where it is), so all users of crecord can benefit.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"241","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14493","author":"martinvonz","id":"89468","dateCreated":"1552678817","dateModified":"1552678817"},{"type":"inline","comment":"`amend_source` includes the full hash. I think it's better to do the same here.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"265","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14493","author":"martinvonz","id":"89467","dateCreated":"1552678817","dateModified":"1552678817"},{"type":"inline","comment":"`extras` is a confusing name for a node (it sounds too much like it's a changeset extras dict). I suggest renaming it to `oldnode`.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"270","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14493","author":"martinvonz","id":"89466","dateCreated":"1552678817","dateModified":"1552678817"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I think it's still unclear if we even want to make that change (I think I would prefer it, but I'd like to hear from others), so let's leave it as is for now.","replyTo":"89315","isNewFile":"1","line":"110","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-uncommit-interactive.t","diffId":"14464","author":"martinvonz","id":"89465","dateCreated":"1552678817","dateModified":"1552678817"},{"type":"inline","comment":"nit: remove the leading space here and in other docstrings for consistency (we seem to have about 60 instances with a leading space and 2900 without)","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"216","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14493","author":"martinvonz","id":"89464","dateCreated":"1552678817","dateModified":"1552678817"},{"type":"inline","comment":"It doesn't look done to me...","replyTo":"89232","isNewFile":"1","line":"253","lineLength":"1","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14464","author":"martinvonz","id":"89463","dateCreated":"1552678817","dateModified":"1552678817"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I didn't mean \"use `cleanupnodes()` too\", I meant \"here too\" :) I.e., use `cleanupnodes()` here just like we do elsewhere in this file, not in addition to using `createmarkers()`. So just delete the `createmarkers()` call.","replyTo":"89227","isNewFile":"1","line":"235","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14464","author":"martinvonz","id":"89462","dateCreated":"1552678817","dateModified":"1552678817"},{"type":"inline","comment":"It looks like this is only useful in the non-interactive case. It's generally preferred to avoid unnecessary work, both because it's wasting computer resources (not really an issue here) and because it makes it clearer how the code works. In this case, it will make it clear that the `--keep` option does not matter with `--interactive`. However, it seems reasonable for `--keep` (and the corresponding config option) to be respected with `--interactive`. Maybe you should pass `keep` it into `_interactiveuncommit()` and use it there? I'd be fine with just leaving a TODO about that (and leave the `keepcommit` code here).","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"185","lineLength":"5","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14493","author":"martinvonz","id":"89461","dateCreated":"1552678817","dateModified":"1552678817"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Can you wrap the commit message to 80 columns? I didn't find anything on https:\/\/www.mercurial-scm.org\/wiki\/ContributingChanges about it, but that's how almost everyone else does it.","author":"martinvonz","id":"89460","dateCreated":"1552678817","dateModified":"1552678817"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Can I work on this as a part as a follow up ? or should i make amends in this patch . ","replyTo":"89228","isNewFile":"1","line":"110","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-uncommit-interactive.t","diffId":"14464","author":"taapas1128","id":"89315","dateCreated":"1552579696","dateModified":"1552579696"},{"type":"comment","comment":"@martinvonz I have made the necessary modifications and updated the description.","author":"taapas1128","id":"89314","dateCreated":"1552579696","dateModified":"1552579696"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14493","author":"taapas1128","id":"89304","dateCreated":"1552574286","dateModified":"1552574286"},{"type":"inline","comment":"nit: indent by 4 spaces","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"230","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14464","author":"martinvonz","id":"89234","dateCreated":"1552497194","dateModified":"1552497194"},{"type":"inline","comment":"nit: indent by 4 spaces","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"261","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14464","author":"martinvonz","id":"89233","dateCreated":"1552497194","dateModified":"1552497194"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I think it's fine to do it directly there, without wrapping. We're shipping this extension with core, so it shouldn't be a problem. It will have no effect unless you've enabled the extension, as far as I can tell.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"253","lineLength":"1","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14464","author":"martinvonz","id":"89232","dateCreated":"1552497194","dateModified":"1552497194"},{"type":"inline","comment":"nit: No need to say that it's a function, and the \"for interactively uncommiting a commit\" seems pretty obvious from the name. Just start with \"Makes a temporary commit...\" instead.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"214","lineLength":"1","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14464","author":"martinvonz","id":"89231","dateCreated":"1552497194","dateModified":"1552497194"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Same nit here: No need to say that it's a function, just start with \"Applies the patch...\"","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"270","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14464","author":"martinvonz","id":"89230","dateCreated":"1552497194","dateModified":"1552497194"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Add \" (EXPERIMENTAL)\" to the end of this description since the feature doesn't work with curses. That way it won't be visible when the user runs `hg help uncommit`.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"148","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14464","author":"martinvonz","id":"89229","dateCreated":"1552497194","dateModified":"1552497194"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I think at least @spectral and @ryanmce had previously suggested that `hg revert -i` should ask you what pieces to keep, not what to discard. Your patch reminded me of that discussion, so I sent D6125. I'm curious to hear what others think about `hg uncommit -i`. Should it ask you what to discard or what to keep? I can see arguments both ways.\n\nPerhaps the strongest argument in favor if showing what to keep is that it makes uncommitting part of a line *much* easier. Let's say you changed a line from \"a\" to \"c\" in the commit and you meant to change it to \"b\" in the commit and leave the change to \"c\" in the working copy. You'd be presented with this:\n```\n-a\n+c\n```\n\nIf what you select is what to keep in the commit, then it seems pretty obvious that you should change that to:\n```\n-a\n+b\n```\n\nIt's much less obvious what to do if you select what to discard.\n\nI think it would also make it easier to implement this feature if the user selected what to keep (we would create a commit based on that and then move the dirstate there).","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"110","lineLength":"0","path":"tests\/test-uncommit-interactive.t","diffId":"14464","author":"martinvonz","id":"89228","dateCreated":"1552497194","dateModified":"1552497194"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Should probably use `scmutil.cleanupnodes()` here too?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"235","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14464","author":"martinvonz","id":"89227","dateCreated":"1552497194","dateModified":"1552497194"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I think you're relying on this empty commit to not be saved, but I think it will be if the user has set `experiemtal.uncommit.keep` (or if they passed `--keep`). It seems better to not even attempt to create it if we don't want it.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"191","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14464","author":"martinvonz","id":"89226","dateCreated":"1552497194","dateModified":"1552497194"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6005#89211, @pulkit wrote:\n>>>! In D6005#89182, @martinvonz wrote:\n>> Can you update the commit message to explain how this works? I think I saw somewhere else that it first uncommits everything and then does an interactive amend. Is that correct?\n> \n> Yes, this is correct.\n>> \n>> Also, I just tried to use this feature and it failed (depending on how many lines were added). I added two lines to a file, committed, then ran `hg uncommit -i` and selected the first line. Then I got this:\n>> \n>> ```\n>> starting interactive selection\n>> patching file z\n>> Hunk #1 succeeded at 2 with fuzz 2 (offset -1 lines).\n>> ```\n> \n> Yes this is also expected with the current implementation. Sometimes uncommit can fail and it will report `Hunk Failed` like this. There is definitely lot to improve in this implementation and I am fine with having this in core first.\n\nThat definitely should be in the commit message.","author":"martinvonz","id":"89225","dateCreated":"1552497194","dateModified":"1552497194"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6005#89182, @martinvonz wrote:\n> Can you update the commit message to explain how this works? I think I saw somewhere else that it first uncommits everything and then does an interactive amend. Is that correct?\n\nYes, this is correct.\n> \n> Also, I just tried to use this feature and it failed (depending on how many lines were added). I added two lines to a file, committed, then ran `hg uncommit -i` and selected the first line. Then I got this:\n> \n> ```\n> starting interactive selection\n> patching file z\n> Hunk #1 succeeded at 2 with fuzz 2 (offset -1 lines).\n> ```\n\nYes this is also expected with the current implementation. Sometimes uncommit can fail and it will report `Hunk Failed` like this. There is definitely lot to improve in this implementation and I am fine with having this in core first.\n\n","author":"pulkit","id":"89211","dateCreated":"1552465939","dateModified":"1552465939"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I suppose no .. because in the very initial patch I combined `hg uncommit` with `hg commit -i`(as was stated in the bug description(https:\/\/bz.mercurial-scm.org\/show_bug.cgi?id=6062)) . But later on I was asked to import it from `evolve` . The basic functionality lies in `_interactiveuncommit()` and the other two functions are imported as dependencies to that. ","author":"taapas1128","id":"89183","dateCreated":"1552416483","dateModified":"1552416483"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Can you update the commit message to explain how this works? I think I saw somewhere else that it first uncommits everything and then does an interactive amend. Is that correct?\n\nAlso, I just tried to use this feature and it failed (depending on how many lines were added). I added two lines to a file, committed, then ran `hg uncommit -i` and selected the first line. Then I got this:\n\n```\nstarting interactive selection\npatching file z\nHunk #1 succeeded at 2 with fuzz 2 (offset -1 lines).\n```\n","author":"martinvonz","id":"89182","dateCreated":"1552414856","dateModified":"1552414856"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14464","author":"taapas1128","id":"89100","dateCreated":"1552324675","dateModified":"1552324675"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14461","author":"taapas1128","id":"89072","dateCreated":"1552319396","dateModified":"1552319396"},{"type":"inline","comment":"okay sending a separate patch right away","replyTo":"88738","isNewFile":"1","line":"399","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14191","author":"taapas1128","id":"89065","dateCreated":"1552318795","dateModified":"1552318795"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Yes, please do. Then we can consider while reviewing that patch if we even need to pass the matcher. It's better to have that discussion separate from this patch.","replyTo":"88737","isNewFile":"1","line":"399","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14191","author":"martinvonz","id":"88738","dateCreated":"1552066880","dateModified":"1552066880"},{"type":"inline","comment":"@martinvonz this part of the patch too (`323,329,366`) has no relation with interactive uncommit but it makes `match` optional for `unamend`. Should I remove is and send it as a seperate patch too ?","replyTo":"87640","isNewFile":"1","line":"399","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14191","author":"taapas1128","id":"88737","dateCreated":"1552066781","dateModified":"1552066781"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14399","author":"taapas1128","id":"88735","dateCreated":"1552058869","dateModified":"1552058869"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Okay . Then I am reverting this back to what it was.","replyTo":"88733","isNewFile":"1","line":"109","lineLength":"1","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14386","author":"taapas1128","id":"88734","dateCreated":"1552058644","dateModified":"1552058644"},{"type":"inline","comment":"So you're fixing something that was missed in an old commit? Please put that fix in a separate patch.","replyTo":"88732","isNewFile":"1","line":"109","lineLength":"1","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14386","author":"martinvonz","id":"88733","dateCreated":"1552057393","dateModified":"1552057393"},{"type":"inline","comment":"In line number `115` a matcher is used . This is between oldctx and netctx now . In D971 a the matcher was removed so the comment was altered . But whenever the matcher was reused the comment wasn't changed .","replyTo":"88643","isNewFile":"1","line":"109","lineLength":"1","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14386","author":"taapas1128","id":"88732","dateCreated":"1552028753","dateModified":"1552028753"},{"type":"inline","comment":"> It is the part of _uncommitdirstate() that has been left behind. okay I am not changing that\n\nAre you referring to D971? I see that your change kind of backs out that change. But why?","replyTo":"88641","isNewFile":"1","line":"109","lineLength":"1","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14386","author":"martinvonz","id":"88643","dateCreated":"1551992859","dateModified":"1551992859"},{"type":"inline","comment":"It is the  part of _uncommitdirstate() that has been left behind. okay I am not changing that","replyTo":"88636","isNewFile":"1","line":"109","lineLength":"1","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14386","author":"taapas1128","id":"88641","dateCreated":"1551992528","dateModified":"1551992528"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14389","author":"taapas1128","id":"88638","dateCreated":"1551992416","dateModified":"1551992416"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Similar existing flags and their descriptions:\n\ncommit: \"use interactive mode\"\namend: \"use interactive mode\"\nforget: \"use interactive mode\"\nrevert: \"interactively select the changes\"\nabsorb: \"interactively select which chunks to apply\"\nshelve: \"interactive mode, only works while creating a shelve\"\n\nI'd prefer to be consistent with one of those. I personally think revert's and absorb's versions are clearest.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"148","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14388","author":"martinvonz","id":"88637","dateCreated":"1551989808","dateModified":"1551989808"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I don't follow the \"not containing changed files matched by match\" part. It *only* fixes the parts matched by the matches, right? Also, I think the matcher is just an optimization -- it would be incorrect, I think, to pass a matcher that doesn't match all the changes between oldctx and newctx. I'd just leave the comment untouched for now. We may even want to remove the matcher argument, but we can do that in a separate patch, if at all.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"109","lineLength":"1","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14386","author":"martinvonz","id":"88636","dateCreated":"1551989808","dateModified":"1551989808"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I preferred the old wording where it said \"newctx\" instead of \"a copy of oldctx\".","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"109","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14386","author":"martinvonz","id":"88635","dateCreated":"1551989808","dateModified":"1551989808"},{"type":"inline","comment":"No need to pass the `interactive` flag here, right?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"107","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14386","author":"martinvonz","id":"88634","dateCreated":"1551989808","dateModified":"1551989808"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Here are some little comments to start with. I haven't even started reviewing the three new functions, but I need to take a break and work on other things a bit now.","author":"martinvonz","id":"88633","dateCreated":"1551989808","dateModified":"1551989808"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14388","author":"taapas1128","id":"88631","dateCreated":"1551989040","dateModified":"1551989040"},{"type":"comment","comment":"@martinvonz cleaned it up . ","author":"taapas1128","id":"88629","dateCreated":"1551988873","dateModified":"1551988873"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14387","author":"taapas1128","id":"88628","dateCreated":"1551988760","dateModified":"1551988760"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14386","author":"taapas1128","id":"88627","dateCreated":"1551988403","dateModified":"1551988403"},{"type":"comment","comment":"As I said a while ago on IRC, it feels like `_fixdirstate()` should not need an `interactive` flag, and it should not even need to be specifically for uncommit. It feels like it should work the same for any case where we move to a different commit without changing the working copy, such as uncommit, unamend, amend, fix (though we may want optimized code paths for some of them). So I took this patch and tried the most naive attempt at unifying the interactive version with the non-interactive version, namely to just drop the code for the interactive path (see patch below). Surprisingly, all tests pass :) So maybe you can just apply the below patch and clean it up (drop the `if True`), or maybe you need to add tests.\n\n```\ndiff --git a\/hgext\/uncommit.py b\/hgext\/uncommit.py\n--- a\/hgext\/uncommit.py\n+++ b\/hgext\/uncommit.py\n@@ -109,59 +109,10 @@ def _fixdirstate(repo, oldctx, newctx, m\n     oldctx to a copy of oldctx not containing changed files matched by\n     match.\n     \"\"\"\n-    ctx = repo['.']\n     ds = repo.dirstate\n     ds.setparents(newctx.node(), node.nullid)\n     copies = dict(ds.copies())\n-    if interactive:\n-        # In interactive cases, we will find the status between oldctx and ctx\n-        # and considering only the files which are changed between oldctx and\n-        # ctx, and the status of what changed between oldctx and ctx will help\n-        # us in defining the exact behavior\n-        s = oldctx.status(ctx, match=match)\n-        for f in s.modified:\n-            # These are files which are modified between oldctx and ctx which\n-            # contains two cases: 1) Were modified in oldctx and some\n-            # modifications are uncommitted\n-            # 2) Were added in oldctx but some part is uncommitted (this cannot\n-            # contain the case when added files are uncommitted completely as\n-            # that will result in status as removed not modified.)\n-            # Also any modifications to a removed file will result the status as\n-            # added, so we have only two cases. So in either of the cases, the\n-            # resulting status can be modified or clean.\n-            if ds[f] == 'r':\n-                # But the file is removed in the working directory, leaving that\n-                # as removed\n-                continue\n-            ds.normallookup(f)\n-\n-        for f in s.added:\n-            # These are the files which are added between oldctx and ctx(new\n-            # one), which means the files which were removed in oldctx\n-            # but uncommitted completely while making the ctx\n-            # This file should be marked as removed if the working directory\n-            # does not adds it back. If it's adds it back, we do a normallookup.\n-            # The file can't be removed in working directory, because it was\n-            # removed in oldctx\n-            if ds[f] == 'a':\n-                ds.normallookup(f)\n-                continue\n-            ds.remove(f)\n-\n-        for f in s.removed:\n-            # These are files which are removed between oldctx and ctx, which\n-            # means the files which were added in oldctx and were completely\n-            # uncommitted in ctx. If a added file is partially uncommitted, that\n-            # would have resulted in modified status, not removed.\n-            # So a file added in a commit, and uncommitting that addition must\n-            # result in file being stated as unknown.\n-            if ds[f] == 'r':\n-                # The working directory say it's removed, so lets make the file\n-                # unknown\n-                ds.drop(f)\n-                continue\n-            ds.add(f)\n-    else:\n+    if True:\n         s = newctx.status(oldctx, match=match)\n         for f in s.modified:\n             if ds[f] == 'r':\n```\n","author":"martinvonz","id":"88625","dateCreated":"1551985450","dateModified":"1551985450"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14385","author":"taapas1128","id":"88624","dateCreated":"1551983082","dateModified":"1551983082"},{"type":"comment","comment":"@pulkit Thanks for pointing that out . That was extremely silly of me . I have corrected that . Is there anything else to be changed ?","author":"taapas1128","id":"88055","dateCreated":"1551390417","dateModified":"1551390417"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14278","author":"taapas1128","id":"88053","dateCreated":"1551390277","dateModified":"1551390277"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I just skimmed through changes and looks like this is missing in the changed version.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"0","line":"101","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14193","author":"pulkit","id":"88049","dateCreated":"1551389274","dateModified":"1551389274"},{"type":"comment","comment":"@pulkit I am unable to figure out why the output for `test-unamend.t` is changing . Any hint on that ?","author":"taapas1128","id":"88046","dateCreated":"1551381557","dateModified":"1551381557"},{"type":"comment","comment":"@martinvonz I made the changes you asked . However I am not sure why `test-unamend.t` is changing because when `interactive` is false so it should behave exactly like the previous `_fixdirstate()` functioned . Can you provide some help with this ? I will work further based on your review.","author":"taapas1128","id":"87647","dateCreated":"1550865111","dateModified":"1550865111"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14193","author":"taapas1128","id":"87644","dateCreated":"1550864664","dateModified":"1550864664"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14192","author":"taapas1128","id":"87642","dateCreated":"1550860371","dateModified":"1550860371"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I've been trying to avoid accessing status fields by index because it's not very readable. Can you use the same pattern as below instead (i.e. `s.modifed` etc)?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"114","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14191","author":"martinvonz","id":"87641","dateCreated":"1550860142","dateModified":"1550860142"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Instead of defining a value here, specify the argument by name when you call the function: `_uncommitdirstate(..., interactive=False)`. But it's probably better to just make `interactive` default to `False` and not pass it here.","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"399","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14191","author":"martinvonz","id":"87640","dateCreated":"1550860142","dateModified":"1550860142"},{"type":"inline","comment":"Keep the match optional instead?","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"400","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14191","author":"martinvonz","id":"87639","dateCreated":"1550860142","dateModified":"1550860142"},{"type":"inline","comment":"I don't think we need to rename it from `_fixdirstate()`, especially since it's used for both uncommit and unamend. (Fix commit message too, of course, if you switch back to the old name.)","replyTo":null,"isNewFile":"1","line":"101","lineLength":"0","path":"hgext\/uncommit.py","diffId":"14191","author":"martinvonz","id":"87638","dateCreated":"1550860142","dateModified":"1550860142"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I haven't reviewed much of it, but here are some initial comments","author":"martinvonz","id":"87637","dateCreated":"1550860142","dateModified":"1550860142"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14191","author":"taapas1128","id":"87630","dateCreated":"1550859507","dateModified":"1550859507"}],"dateCreated":"1550859507","dateModified":"1579887125","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"4664","callsign":"HG","title":"mergecommit: add a new extension to merge in-memory and create a commit","author":"pulkit","summary":"This patch adds a new mergecommit command which is very useful for workflows\nwhere there is automated merging involved. This patch uses existing in-memory\nmerge API to merge in-memory and create a commit.\n\nI was thinking about --commit flag to merge command, but then we need other\ncommitopts too, so created a new command.\n\nThis patches filemerge.py to not raise IMMConflictsError on first conflict\nbecause we need a list of conflicts in the end.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"345","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["durin42","marcink","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117549","dateCreated":"1579887121","dateModified":"1579887121"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117548","dateCreated":"1579887121","dateModified":"1579887121"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D4664#100404, @durin42 wrote:\n> Neat. I assume you normally check these out later?\n\nFor now yes. The plan was to make `hg cat` support cat-ing maultiple files preventing to checkout.","author":"pulkit","id":"100440","dateCreated":"1568267806","dateModified":"1568267806"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Neat. I assume you normally check these out later?","author":"durin42","id":"100404","dateCreated":"1568215778","dateModified":"1568215778"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I don't aim for this to get reviewed and pushed. This is here right now for sharing. We are using this extension internally for months now and has shown good results.","author":"pulkit","id":"87922","dateCreated":"1551193372","dateModified":"1551193372"},{"type":"update","diffId":"14248","author":"pulkit","id":"87921","dateCreated":"1551192772","dateModified":"1551192772"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Thinking about this more, I think I have not done a good job writing commit message. The extension is very useful when you have automation around merges or you do merges because of the following reasons:\n\n  * The merge is done in-memory and is very fast if you disable the path conflicts auditing\n  * You can specify a merge destination using --dest flag, which means you don't need to update to merge. You can merge two changesets from anywhere\n  * You can parallelize multiple merges\n  * This can be used as --dry-run for hg merge as it can tell whether a merge will result in conflicts or not without applying anything\n\nThat said, I am not sure if this looks like a good candidate for in-core extension. However, we want to share the work we have done on speeding up merge internally so that it can help other companies which uses merges. So, feel free to pick this up from here if you need this. :)","author":"pulkit","id":"72700","dateCreated":"1538342063","dateModified":"1538342063"},{"type":"update","diffId":"11198","author":"pulkit","id":"70929","dateCreated":"1537361525","dateModified":"1537361525"}],"dateCreated":"1537361525","dateModified":"1579887122","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"6845","callsign":"HG","title":"pushkeys: introduce a server.bookmarks-pushkey-reject option to complement D6776","author":"idlsoft","summary":"","testPlan":"","lineCount":"30","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117546","dateCreated":"1579887120","dateModified":"1579887120"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117545","dateCreated":"1579887120","dateModified":"1579887120"},{"type":"update","diffId":"16523","author":"idlsoft","id":"100458","dateCreated":"1568306882","dateModified":"1568306882"}],"dateCreated":"1568306882","dateModified":"1579887120","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"6847","callsign":"HG","title":"dont-accept-this: this is for reference in D6776","author":"valentin.gatienbaron","summary":"","testPlan":"","lineCount":"108","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117543","dateCreated":"1579887118","dateModified":"1579887118"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117542","dateCreated":"1579887118","dateModified":"1579887118"},{"type":"update","diffId":"16527","author":"valentin.gatienbaron","id":"100482","dateCreated":"1568348707","dateModified":"1568348707"}],"dateCreated":"1568348707","dateModified":"1579887119","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"6859","callsign":"HG","title":"rust-cpython: mark PySharedState as Sync so &'PySharedState can be Send (RFC)","author":"yuja","summary":"The goal is to store &'static PySharedState in $leaked struct, which allows\nus to move the $leaked struct out of the macro. Currently, it depends on\n$inner.py_shared_state(py).\n\nI think PySharedState is Sync because any mutation is synchronized by the\nPython GIL, but I'm not pretty sure. I want to know if that's correct before\nmoving forward.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"4","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["Alphare","durin42","kevincox","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117537","dateCreated":"1579887115","dateModified":"1579887115"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117536","dateCreated":"1579887115","dateModified":"1579887115"},{"type":"comment","comment":"Also, since it's possible we could call back into Python code and *that* could release-and-reacquire the GIL, the GIL guarding is probably insufficient to make this a \"safe lie\".","author":"durin42","id":"100907","dateCreated":"1569267328","dateModified":"1569267328"},{"type":"comment","comment":"I asked some coworkers, and they said:\n\n> I do not believe this to be correct. An object is Sync if it is *inherently* thread-safe. This object is not -- the first thing borrow_mut does is a racy read of mutably_borrowed.\n\nso I'm now leaning towards this being a bad idea.","author":"durin42","id":"100906","dateCreated":"1569267265","dateModified":"1569267265"},{"type":"comment","comment":"It is indeed `Sync` because the `py_class!` macro forces us to have a reference to the GIL at the type level to access the data attributes, but I would also like to be extra sure and have someone else confirm it.","author":"Alphare","id":"100700","dateCreated":"1568711038","dateModified":"1568711038"},{"type":"update","diffId":"16562","author":"yuja","id":"100693","dateCreated":"1568676461","dateModified":"1568676461"}],"dateCreated":"1568676461","dateModified":"1579887115","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"6957","callsign":"HG","title":"rebase: unconditionally clear merge state when `--stop`ing a rebase","author":"durin42","summary":"I am NOT sure of the correctness of this change, but I've hit a point\non a work repository where the needupdate function returns false and\nso the merge state never gets correctly cleared. As far as I can tell\nwhen we're *always* in a merge state at this point, so we should\n*always* clear the merge state.\n\nI'm not sure how to structure the test at the moment, but if others\nagree that this looks plausible I'll try and figure out what state my\nwork repository is in to craft a test case that can be used to prevent\nany backsliding on this fix.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"7","dependsOn":[],"reviewers":["martinvonz","baymax"],"ccs":["marmoute","mercurial-devel"],"actions":[{"type":"comment","comment":"There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.\n\nBy policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.\n\nPlease, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should still be discussed.\n\n:baymax:need-review-idle:\n","author":"baymax","id":"117534","dateCreated":"1579887114","dateModified":"1579887114"},{"type":"reject","author":"baymax","id":"117533","dateCreated":"1579887114","dateModified":"1579887114"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6957#101985, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>>! In D6957#101984, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>>! In D6957#101977, @martinvonz wrote:\n>>> How was it failing for you?\n>>> \n>>> I don't think I've used `hg rebase --stop`, but I had been wondering what it would do with the working directory. It's unclear to me what it should do, and now after looking at the code, it's also unclear what the author meant it to do. Maybe it would be best to just leave the working directory untouched? Oh, we should also compare to what `hg evolve --stop` does (I haven't checked).\n>> \n>> The evolve semantic, is to:\n>> * get out of the current conflict (so, reverting the working copy)\n>> * preserve all successful evolution so far.\n>> \n>> Since you cannot `continue` after the --stop, we would not be able to do anything good with the conflict if the user resolved it anyway.\n>> \n>> I think rebase should have the same logic and revert the current conflict (preserving all successfully rebased revision)\n> \n> True, you'd get to resolve the conflicts on the next `hg rebase\/evolve` anyway, so I agree there's no need to preserve the working copy.\n> \n> @durin42, any idea how you ended up with just one working copy parent?\n\nI don't have just one parent. If you want to inspect the state, look at `augie\/a 59473`;)","author":"durin42","id":"101986","dateCreated":"1570195921","dateModified":"1570195921"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6957#101984, @marmoute wrote:\n>>>! In D6957#101977, @martinvonz wrote:\n>> How was it failing for you?\n>> \n>> I don't think I've used `hg rebase --stop`, but I had been wondering what it would do with the working directory. It's unclear to me what it should do, and now after looking at the code, it's also unclear what the author meant it to do. Maybe it would be best to just leave the working directory untouched? Oh, we should also compare to what `hg evolve --stop` does (I haven't checked).\n> \n> The evolve semantic, is to:\n> * get out of the current conflict (so, reverting the working copy)\n> * preserve all successful evolution so far.\n> \n> Since you cannot `continue` after the --stop, we would not be able to do anything good with the conflict if the user resolved it anyway.\n> \n> I think rebase should have the same logic and revert the current conflict (preserving all successfully rebased revision)\n\nTrue, you'd get to resolve the conflicts on the next `hg rebase\/evolve` anyway, so I agree there's no need to preserve the working copy.\n\n@durin42, any idea how you ended up with just one working copy parent?\n","author":"martinvonz","id":"101985","dateCreated":"1570195088","dateModified":"1570195088"},{"type":"comment","comment":">>! In D6957#101977, @martinvonz wrote:\n> How was it failing for you?\n> \n> I don't think I've used `hg rebase --stop`, but I had been wondering what it would do with the working directory. It's unclear to me what it should do, and now after looking at the code, it's also unclear what the author meant it to do. Maybe it would be best to just leave the working directory untouched? Oh, we should also compare to what `hg evolve --stop` does (I haven't checked).\n\nThe evolve semantic, is to:\n* get out of the current conflict (so, reverting the working copy)\n* preserve all successful evolution so far.\n\nSince you cannot `continue` after the --stop, we would not be able to do anything good with the conflict if the user resolved it anyway.\n\nI think rebase should have the same logic and revert the current conflict (preserving all successfully rebased revision)","author":"marmoute","id":"101984","dateCreated":"1570194688","dateModified":"1570194688"},{"type":"comment","comment":"How was it failing for you?\n\nI don't think I've used `hg rebase --stop`, but I had been wondering what it would do with the working directory. It's unclear to me what it should do, and now after looking at the code, it's also unclear what the author meant it to do. Maybe it would be best to just leave the working directory untouched? Oh, we should also compare to what `hg evolve --stop` does (I haven't checked).","author":"martinvonz","id":"101977","dateCreated":"1570182767","dateModified":"1570182767"},{"type":"update","diffId":"16789","author":"durin42","id":"101967","dateCreated":"1570153196","dateModified":"1570153196"}],"dateCreated":"1570153196","dateModified":"1579887114","status":"Needs Revision"},{"id":"6962","callsign":"HG","title":"config: add defaults and experimental status for --debug flag","author":"navaneeth.suresh","summary":"This patch adds `EXPERIMENTAL` to the output of 'showconfig --debug'\nfor experimental flags which are not under the `section == 'experimental'`.\nThis also adds the default value of the config item if it differs from\nthe current value.","testPlan":"","lineCount":"18","dependsOn":["6709"],"reviewers":["baymax"],"ccs":["mercurial-devel"],"act