view mercurial/peer.py @ 31765:264baeef3588

show: new extension for displaying various repository data Currently, Mercurial has a number of commands to show information. And, there are features coming down the pipe that will introduce more commands for showing information. Currently, when introducing a new class of data or a view that we wish to expose to the user, the strategy is to introduce a new command or overload an existing command, sometimes both. For example, there is a desire to formalize the wip/smartlog/underway/mine functionality that many have devised. There is also a desire to introduce a "topics" concept. Others would like views of "the current stack." In the current model, we'd need a new command for wip/smartlog/etc (that behaves a lot like a pre-defined alias of `hg log`). For topics, we'd likely overload `hg topic[s]` to both display and manipulate topics. Adding new commands for every pre-defined query doesn't scale well and pollutes `hg help`. Overloading commands to perform read-only and write operations is arguably an UX anti-pattern: while having all functionality for a given concept in one command is nice, having a single command doing multiple discrete operations is not. Furthermore, a user may be surprised that a command they thought was read-only actually changes something. We discussed this at the Mercurial 4.0 Sprint in Paris and decided that having a single command where we could hang pre-defined views of various data would be a good idea. Having such a command would: * Help prevent an explosion of new query-related commands * Create a clear separation between read and write operations (mitigates footguns) * Avoids overloading the meaning of commands that manipulate data (bookmark, tag, branch, etc) (while we can't take away the existing behavior for BC reasons, we now won't introduce this behavior on new commands) * Allows users to discover informational views more easily by aggregating them in a single location * Lowers the barrier to creating the new views (since the barrier to creating a top-level command is relatively high) So, this commit introduces the `hg show` command via the "show" extension. This command accepts a positional argument of the "view" to show. New views can be registered with a decorator. To prove it works, we implement the "bookmarks" view, which shows a table of bookmarks and their associated nodes. We introduce a new style to hold everything used by `hg show`. For our initial bookmarks view, the output varies from `hg bookmarks`: * Padding is performed in the template itself as opposed to Python * Revision integers are not shown * shortest() is used to display a 5 character node by default (as opposed to static 12 characters) I chose to implement the "bookmarks" view first because it is simple and shouldn't invite too much bikeshedding that detracts from the evaluation of `hg show` itself. But there is an important point to consider: we now have 2 ways to show a list of bookmarks. I'm not a fan of introducing multiple ways to do very similar things. So it might be worth discussing how we wish to tackle this issue for bookmarks, tags, branches, MQ series, etc. I also made the choice of explicitly declaring the default show template not part of the standard BC guarantees. History has shown that we make mistakes and poor choices with output formatting but can't fix these mistakes later because random tools are parsing output and we don't want to break these tools. Optimizing for human consumption is one of my goals for `hg show`. So, by not covering the formatting as part of BC, the barrier to future change is much lower and humans benefit. There are some improvements that can be made to formatting. For example, we don't yet use label() in the templates. We obviously want this for color. But I'm not sure if we should reuse the existing log.* labels or invent new ones. I figure we can punt that to a follow-up. At the aforementioned Sprint, we discussed and discarded various alternatives to `hg show`. We considered making `hg log <view>` perform this behavior. The main reason we can't do this is because a positional argument to `hg log` can be a file path and if there is a conflict between a path name and a view name, behavior is ambiguous. We could have introduced `hg log --view` or similar, but we felt that required too much typing (we don't want to require a command flag to show a view) and wasn't very discoverable. Furthermore, `hg log` is optimized for showing changelog data and there are things that `hg display` could display that aren't changelog centric. There were concerns about using "show" as the command name. Some users already have a "show" alias that is similar to `hg export`. There were also concerns that Git users adapted to `git show` would be confused by `hg show`'s different behavior. The main difference here is `git show` prints an `hg export` like view of the current commit by default and `hg show` requires an argument. `git show` can also display any Git object. `git show` does not support displaying more complex views: just single objects. If we implemented `hg show <hash>` or `hg show <identifier>`, `hg show` would be a superset of `git show`. Although, I'm hesitant to do that at this time because I view `hg show` as a higher-level querying command and there are namespace collisions between valid identifiers and registered views. There is also a prefix collision with `hg showconfig`, which is an alias of `hg config`. We also considered `hg view`, but that is already used by the "hgk" extension. `hg display` was also proposed at one point. It has a prefix collision with `hg diff`. General consensus was "show" or "view" are the best verbs. And since "view" was taken, "show" was chosen. There are a number of inline TODOs in this patch. Some of these represent decisions yet to be made. Others represent features requiring non-trivial complexity. Rather than bloat the patch or invite additional bikeshedding, I figured I'd document future enhancements via TODO so we can get a minimal implmentation landed. Something is better than nothing.
author Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc@gmail.com>
date Fri, 24 Mar 2017 19:19:00 -0700
parents ead25aa27a43
children e2fc2122029c
line wrap: on
line source

# peer.py - repository base classes for mercurial
#
# Copyright 2005, 2006 Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>
# Copyright 2006 Vadim Gelfer <vadim.gelfer@gmail.com>
#
# This software may be used and distributed according to the terms of the
# GNU General Public License version 2 or any later version.

from __future__ import absolute_import

from .i18n import _
from . import (
    error,
    util,
)

# abstract batching support

class future(object):
    '''placeholder for a value to be set later'''
    def set(self, value):
        if util.safehasattr(self, 'value'):
            raise error.RepoError("future is already set")
        self.value = value

class batcher(object):
    '''base class for batches of commands submittable in a single request

    All methods invoked on instances of this class are simply queued and
    return a a future for the result. Once you call submit(), all the queued
    calls are performed and the results set in their respective futures.
    '''
    def __init__(self):
        self.calls = []
    def __getattr__(self, name):
        def call(*args, **opts):
            resref = future()
            self.calls.append((name, args, opts, resref,))
            return resref
        return call
    def submit(self):
        raise NotImplementedError()

class iterbatcher(batcher):

    def submit(self):
        raise NotImplementedError()

    def results(self):
        raise NotImplementedError()

class localbatch(batcher):
    '''performs the queued calls directly'''
    def __init__(self, local):
        batcher.__init__(self)
        self.local = local
    def submit(self):
        for name, args, opts, resref in self.calls:
            resref.set(getattr(self.local, name)(*args, **opts))

class localiterbatcher(iterbatcher):
    def __init__(self, local):
        super(iterbatcher, self).__init__()
        self.local = local

    def submit(self):
        # submit for a local iter batcher is a noop
        pass

    def results(self):
        for name, args, opts, resref in self.calls:
            yield getattr(self.local, name)(*args, **opts)

def batchable(f):
    '''annotation for batchable methods

    Such methods must implement a coroutine as follows:

    @batchable
    def sample(self, one, two=None):
        # Handle locally computable results first:
        if not one:
            yield "a local result", None
        # Build list of encoded arguments suitable for your wire protocol:
        encargs = [('one', encode(one),), ('two', encode(two),)]
        # Create future for injection of encoded result:
        encresref = future()
        # Return encoded arguments and future:
        yield encargs, encresref
        # Assuming the future to be filled with the result from the batched
        # request now. Decode it:
        yield decode(encresref.value)

    The decorator returns a function which wraps this coroutine as a plain
    method, but adds the original method as an attribute called "batchable",
    which is used by remotebatch to split the call into separate encoding and
    decoding phases.
    '''
    def plain(*args, **opts):
        batchable = f(*args, **opts)
        encargsorres, encresref = next(batchable)
        if not encresref:
            return encargsorres # a local result in this case
        self = args[0]
        encresref.set(self._submitone(f.func_name, encargsorres))
        return next(batchable)
    setattr(plain, 'batchable', f)
    return plain

class peerrepository(object):

    def batch(self):
        return localbatch(self)

    def iterbatch(self):
        """Batch requests but allow iterating over the results.

        This is to allow interleaving responses with things like
        progress updates for clients.
        """
        return localiterbatcher(self)

    def capable(self, name):
        '''tell whether repo supports named capability.
        return False if not supported.
        if boolean capability, return True.
        if string capability, return string.'''
        caps = self._capabilities()
        if name in caps:
            return True
        name_eq = name + '='
        for cap in caps:
            if cap.startswith(name_eq):
                return cap[len(name_eq):]
        return False

    def requirecap(self, name, purpose):
        '''raise an exception if the given capability is not present'''
        if not self.capable(name):
            raise error.CapabilityError(
                _('cannot %s; remote repository does not '
                  'support the %r capability') % (purpose, name))

    def local(self):
        '''return peer as a localrepo, or None'''
        return None

    def peer(self):
        return self

    def canpush(self):
        return True

    def close(self):
        pass