obsolete: explicitly track folds inside the markers
We now record information to be able to recognize "fold" event from
obsolescence markers. To do so, we track the following pieces of information:
a) a fold ID. Unique to that fold (per successor),
b) the number of predecessors,
c) the index of the predecessor in that fold.
We will now be able to create an algorithm able to find "predecessorssets".
We now store this data in the generic "metadata" field of the markers.
Updating the format to have a more compact storage for this would be useful.
This way of tracking a fold through multiple markers could be applied to split
too. This would have two advantages:
1) We get a simpler format, since number of successors is limited to [0-1].
2) We can better deal with situations where only some of the split successors
are pushed to a remote repository.
We should look into the relevance of such a change before updating the on-disk
format.
note: unlike splits, folds do not have to deal with cases where only some of
the markers have been synchronized. As they all share the same successor
changesets, they are all relevant to the same nodes.
This test test the low-level definition of stack, agnostic from all formatting
Initial setup
$ cat << EOF >> $HGRCPATH
> [ui]
> logtemplate = {rev} {branch} {phase} {desc|firstline}\n
> [extensions]
> rebase=
> [experimental]
> evolution=createmarkers,exchange,allowunstable
> EOF
$ hg init main
$ cd main
$ hg branch other
marked working directory as branch other
(branches are permanent and global, did you want a bookmark?)
$ echo aaa > aaa
$ hg add aaa
$ hg commit -m c_a
$ echo aaa > bbb
$ hg add bbb
$ hg commit -m c_b
$ hg branch foo
marked working directory as branch foo
$ echo aaa > ccc
$ hg add ccc
$ hg commit -m c_c
$ echo aaa > ddd
$ hg add ddd
$ hg commit -m c_d
$ echo aaa > eee
$ hg add eee
$ hg commit -m c_e
$ echo aaa > fff
$ hg add fff
$ hg commit -m c_f
$ hg log -G
@ 5 foo draft c_f
|
o 4 foo draft c_e
|
o 3 foo draft c_d
|
o 2 foo draft c_c
|
o 1 other draft c_b
|
o 0 other draft c_a
Check that stack doesn't include public changesets
--------------------------------------------------
$ hg up other
0 files updated, 0 files merged, 4 files removed, 0 files unresolved
$ hg log -G -r "stack()"
@ 1 other draft c_b
|
o 0 other draft c_a
$ hg phase --public 'branch("other")'
$ hg log -G -r "stack()"
$ hg up foo
4 files updated, 0 files merged, 0 files removed, 0 files unresolved
Simple test
-----------
'stack()' list all changeset in the branch
$ hg branch
foo
$ hg log -G -r "stack()"
@ 5 foo draft c_f
|
o 4 foo draft c_e
|
o 3 foo draft c_d
|
o 2 foo draft c_c
|
~
Case with some of the branch unstable
------------------------------------
$ hg up 3
0 files updated, 0 files merged, 2 files removed, 0 files unresolved
$ echo bbb > ddd
$ hg commit --amend
2 new orphan changesets
$ hg log -G
@ 6 foo draft c_d
|
| * 5 foo draft c_f
| |
| * 4 foo draft c_e
| |
| x 3 foo draft c_d
|/
o 2 foo draft c_c
|
o 1 other public c_b
|
o 0 other public c_a
$ hg log -G -r "stack()"
@ 6 foo draft c_d
|
~
$ hg up -r "desc(c_e)"
2 files updated, 0 files merged, 0 files removed, 0 files unresolved
$ hg log -G -r "stack()"
@ 4 foo draft c_e
|
x 3 foo draft c_d
|
~
$ hg up -r "desc(c_d)"
1 files updated, 0 files merged, 1 files removed, 0 files unresolved
$ hg log -G -r "stack()"
@ 6 foo draft c_d
|
~
Case with multiple topological heads
------------------------------------
Make things linear again
$ hg rebase -s 'desc(c_e)' -d 'desc(c_d) - obsolete()'
rebasing 4:4f2a69f6d380 "c_e"
rebasing 5:913c298d8b0a "c_f"
$ hg log -G
o 8 foo draft c_f
|
o 7 foo draft c_e
|
@ 6 foo draft c_d
|
o 2 foo draft c_c
|
o 1 other public c_b
|
o 0 other public c_a
Create the second branch
$ hg up 'desc(c_d)'
0 files updated, 0 files merged, 0 files removed, 0 files unresolved
$ echo aaa > ggg
$ hg add ggg
$ hg commit -m c_g
created new head
$ echo aaa > hhh
$ hg add hhh
$ hg commit -m c_h
$ hg log -G
@ 10 foo draft c_h
|
o 9 foo draft c_g
|
| o 8 foo draft c_f
| |
| o 7 foo draft c_e
|/
o 6 foo draft c_d
|
o 2 foo draft c_c
|
o 1 other public c_b
|
o 0 other public c_a
Test output
$ hg log -G -r "stack(10)"
@ 10 foo draft c_h
|
o 9 foo draft c_g
|
~
$ hg log -G -r "stack(8)"
o 8 foo draft c_f
|
o 7 foo draft c_e
|
~
$ hg log -G -r "stack(head())"
@ 10 foo draft c_h
|
o 9 foo draft c_g
|
~
o 8 foo draft c_f
|
o 7 foo draft c_e
|
~
Check the stack order
$ hg log -r "first(stack())"
9 foo draft c_g
$ hg log -r "first(stack(10))"
9 foo draft c_g
$ hg log -r "first(stack(8))"
7 foo draft c_e
$ hg log -r "first(stack(head()))"
7 foo draft c_e
Case with multiple heads with unstability involved
--------------------------------------------------
We amend the message to make sure the display base pick the right changeset
$ hg up 'desc(c_d)'
0 files updated, 0 files merged, 2 files removed, 0 files unresolved
$ echo ccc > ddd
$ hg commit --amend -m 'c_D'
4 new orphan changesets
$ hg rebase -d . -s 'desc(c_g)'
rebasing 9:2ebb6e48ab8a "c_g"
rebasing 10:634f38e27a1d "c_h"
$ hg log -G
o 13 foo draft c_h
|
o 12 foo draft c_g
|
@ 11 foo draft c_D
|
| * 8 foo draft c_f
| |
| * 7 foo draft c_e
| |
| x 6 foo draft c_d
|/
o 2 foo draft c_c
|
o 1 other public c_b
|
o 0 other public c_a
We should improve stack definition to also show 12 and 13 here
$ hg log -G -r "stack()"
@ 11 foo draft c_D
|
~