Yuya Nishihara <yuya@tcha.org> [Fri, 11 Sep 2020 15:08:58 +0900] rev 45482
log: reorganize if-else and for loop in logcmdutil._makematcher()
The test conditions are branchy depending on --follow and --rev options,
so it should be better to switch first by --follow --rev.
Note that revs is not empty so "if follow and startctxs" can be replaced
with "if follow and opts.get(b'rev')".
Pulkit Goyal <7895pulkit@gmail.com> [Wed, 26 Aug 2020 16:37:23 +0530] rev 45481
merge: update commitinfo from all mergeresults during bid merge
During bid merge, it's not clear which commitinfo should be stored and which one
should not. This depends on which side the bid merge chooses for a file. For
this we will need to refactor bid merge code and commitinfo handling.
For now, we just blindly updates info since we hardly have any users of
commitinfo and this will help us in testing and clearing out further path.
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D8965
Pulkit Goyal <7895pulkit@gmail.com> [Mon, 24 Aug 2020 17:22:28 +0530] rev 45480
merge: add missing ACTION_KEEP when both remote and ancestor are not present
Previous patch may lead to confusion that the related criss-cross merge is
consistent when done from any of the parents. However this is not true and we
were missing setting an ACTION_KEEP.
This patch now exposes that bid-merge favors ACTION_KEEP always and the result
of merge is different when started from different parents.
This change also effects a test case above where bid merge was wrongly picking
`r` because it was missing keep related information from one of the ancestor.
After this test, we are back in a state in the criss-cross merge tests where the
result depends on which parent we are merging from.
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D8941
Pulkit Goyal <7895pulkit@gmail.com> [Mon, 24 Aug 2020 15:20:09 +0530] rev 45479
merge: store ACTION_KEEP_ABSENT when we are keeping the file absent locally
If a file is not present on the local side, and it's unchanged between other
merge parent and ancestor, we don't use any action, neither we had a if-else
branch for that condition. This leads to bid-merge missing that there is a
such action possible which can be performed.
As test changes demonstrate, we now choose the locally deleted side instead
of choosing the remote one consistently. This is also wrong behavior which is
resulted because of missing possible action. It will be fixed in next patch.
This whole logic is not acurrate as we should prompt user on what to do
when this kind of criss-cross merge is in play.
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D8940