Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Thu, 23 Feb 2023 19:07:58 +0100] rev 50238
bundlerepo: handle changegroup induced phase movement in the associated method
These movement comes from handling the changegroup part, so we keeps the code
grouped. This will be important when handling more part (and more changegroup
part in the future)
This induce a small code duplication, but it does not looks terrible.
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Thu, 23 Feb 2023 19:06:24 +0100] rev 50237
bundlerepo: move most attribute declaration earlier in __init__
The expected attribute are clearer this way. The bundle handling code is responsible for setting most of it.
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Thu, 23 Feb 2023 19:04:44 +0100] rev 50236
bundlerepo: move the handling of bundl1 in its own method
This should make the overall flow simpler to follow.
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Thu, 23 Feb 2023 19:02:01 +0100] rev 50235
bundlerepo: expliclty handing cg part from bundle2
We will handle other types of parts soon (phase-heads) so we need some cleanup
first.
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Thu, 23 Feb 2023 15:37:46 +0100] rev 50234
transaction: use the standard transaction mechanism to backup branch
Branch is a bit special :
- It currently does not collaborate with the transaction (or any scoping) for
writing (this is bad)
- It can change without the lock being taken (it is protected by `wlock`)
So we rely on the same mechanism as for the backup of the other dirstate file:
- we only do a backup if we hold the wlock
- we force a backup though the transaction
Since "branch" write does not collaborate with the transaction, we cannot back
it up "at the last minute" as we do for the dirstate. We have to back it up
"upfront". Since we have a backup, the transaction is no longer doing its
"quick_abort" and get noisy. Which is quite annoying. To work around this, and
to avoid jumping in yet-another-rabbit-hole of "getting branch written
properly", I am doing horrible things to the transaction in the meantime.
We should be able to get this code go away during the next cycle.
In the meantime, I prefer to take this small stop so that we stop abusing the
"journal" and "undo" mechanism instead of the proper backup mechanism of the
transaction.
Also note that this change regress the warning message for the legacy fallback
introduced in 2008 when issue902 got fixed in dd5a501cb97f (Mercurial 1.0).
I feel like this is fine as issue 902 remains fixed, and this would only affect
people deploying a mix of 15 year old Mercurial and modern mercurial, and using
branch and rollback extensively.
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Thu, 23 Feb 2023 04:53:34 +0100] rev 50233
transaction: no longer explicitly cache bookmarks
The transaction file generation is already dealing with the backup for this.
So, no need to duplicate such backup.
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Wed, 22 Feb 2023 18:58:02 +0100] rev 50232
transaction: no longer explicitly cache phaseroots
The transaction file generation is already dealing with the backup for this.
So, no need to duplicate such backup.
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Thu, 23 Feb 2023 04:28:24 +0100] rev 50231
narrow: enforce that narrow spec is written within a transaction
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Thu, 23 Feb 2023 04:42:17 +0100] rev 50230
narrow: write the narrow spec in a transaction during share
It will be simpler if all write happens within transaction.
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Thu, 23 Feb 2023 04:36:19 +0100] rev 50229
narrow: open the transaction sooner when unbundling
That way, the narrow spec changes will be done within a transaction.