Fri, 24 Jan 2020 10:39:55 -0800 copies: print debug information about copies per side/branch
Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz@google.com> [Fri, 24 Jan 2020 10:39:55 -0800] rev 44197
copies: print debug information about copies per side/branch Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D7987
Wed, 22 Jan 2020 15:31:17 -0800 copies: make mergecopies() distinguish between copies on each side
Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz@google.com> [Wed, 22 Jan 2020 15:31:17 -0800] rev 44196
copies: make mergecopies() distinguish between copies on each side I find it confusing that most of the dicts returned from `mergecopies()` have entries specific to one branch of the merge, but they're still combined into dict. For example, you can't tell if `copy = {"bar": "foo"}` means that "foo" was copied to "bar" on the first branch or the second. It also feels like there are bugs lurking here because we may mistake which side the copy happened on. However, for most of the dicts, it's not possible that there is disagreement. For example, `renamedelete` keeps track of renames that happened on one side of the merge where the other side deleted the file. There can't be a disagreement there (because we record that in the `diverge` dict instead). For regular copies/renames, there can be a disagreement. Let's say file "foo" was copied to "bar" on one branch and file "baz" was copied to "bar" on the other. Beacause we only return one `copy` dict, we end up replacing the `{"bar": "foo"}` entry by `{"bar": "baz"}`. The merge code (`manifestmerge()`) will then decide that that means "both renamed from 'baz'". We should probably treat it as a conflict instead. The next few patches will make `mergecopies()` return two instances of most of the returned copies. That will lead to a bit more code (~40 lines), but I think it makes both `copies.mergecopies()` and `merge.manifestmerge()` clearer. Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D7986
Fri, 24 Jan 2020 17:25:40 -0800 pathutil: mark parent directories as audited as we go
Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz@google.com> [Fri, 24 Jan 2020 17:25:40 -0800] rev 44195
pathutil: mark parent directories as audited as we go Before 0b7ce0b16d8a (pathauditor: change parts verification order to be root first, 2016-02-11), we used to validate child directories before parents. It was then important to only mark the child audited only after we had audited its parent (ancestors). I'm pretty sure we don't need to do that any more, now that we audit parents before children. Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D8002
(0) -30000 -10000 -3000 -1000 -300 -100 -30 -10 -3 +3 +10 +30 +100 +300 +1000 +3000 tip