mercurial/thirdparty/cbor/README.rst
author Pulkit Goyal <pulkit@yandex-team.ru>
Wed, 10 Oct 2018 17:36:59 +0300
changeset 40337 cb516a854bc7
parent 37126 4bd73a955ab0
permissions -rw-r--r--
narrow: only send the narrowspecs back if ACL in play I am unable to think why we need to send narrowspecs back from the server. The current state adds a 'narrow:spec' part to each changegroup which is generated when narrow extension is enabled. So we are sending narrowspecs on pull also. There is a problem with sending the narrowspecs the way we are doing it right now. We add include and exclude as parameter of the 'narrow:spec' bundle2 part. The the len of include or exclude string increase 255 which is obvious while working on large repos, bundle2 generation code breaks. For more on that refer issue5952 on bugzilla. I was thinking why we need to send the narrowspecs back, and deleted the 'narrow:spec' bundle2 part generation code and found that only narrow-acl test has some failure. With this patch, we will only send the 'narrow:spec' bundle2 part if ACL is enabled because the original narrowspecs in those cases can be a subset of narrowspecs user requested. There are phase related output change in couple of tests. The output change shows that we are now dealing in public phases completely. So maybe sending the narrow:spec bundle2 part was preventing phases being exchanged or phase bundle2 data being applied. Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D4931

.. image:: https://travis-ci.org/agronholm/cbor2.svg?branch=master
  :target: https://travis-ci.org/agronholm/cbor2
  :alt: Build Status
.. image:: https://coveralls.io/repos/github/agronholm/cbor2/badge.svg?branch=master
  :target: https://coveralls.io/github/agronholm/cbor2?branch=master
  :alt: Code Coverage

This library provides encoding and decoding for the Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)
(`RFC 7049`_) serialization format.

There exists another Python CBOR implementation (cbor) which is faster on CPython due to its C
extensions. On PyPy, cbor2 and cbor are almost identical in performance. The other implementation
also lacks documentation and a comprehensive test suite, does not support most standard extension
tags and is known to crash (segfault) when passed a cyclic structure (say, a list containing
itself).

.. _RFC 7049: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7049

Project links
-------------

* `Documentation <http://cbor2.readthedocs.org/>`_
* `Source code <https://github.com/agronholm/cbor2>`_
* `Issue tracker <https://github.com/agronholm/cbor2/issues>`_