Sun, 21 Dec 2014 14:04:20 -0800 namespaces: remove names method on the namespaces object
Sean Farley <sean.michael.farley@gmail.com> [Sun, 21 Dec 2014 14:04:20 -0800] rev 23738
namespaces: remove names method on the namespaces object Now that there is an object for each individual namespace, we use that instead of the method on the collection of namespaces.
Sun, 21 Dec 2014 14:01:52 -0800 templatekw: update namespace calls
Sean Farley <sean.michael.farley@gmail.com> [Sun, 21 Dec 2014 14:01:52 -0800] rev 23737
templatekw: update namespace calls Previous patches changed the namespace api to be more of an object-oriented approach. This patch updates the template function to use said api changes.
Sun, 21 Dec 2014 13:56:32 -0800 namespaces: add __getitem__ property
Sean Farley <sean.michael.farley@gmail.com> [Sun, 21 Dec 2014 13:56:32 -0800] rev 23736
namespaces: add __getitem__ property Since the namespaces object uses an underlying (sorted) dictionary to store the namespaces, it makes sense to expose this to naturally gain access to those namespaces.
Tue, 06 Jan 2015 18:18:28 -0600 merge with stable
Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com> [Tue, 06 Jan 2015 18:18:28 -0600] rev 23735
merge with stable
Mon, 05 Jan 2015 22:18:55 -0800 cmdutil.jsonchangeset: properly compute added and removed files stable
Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc@gmail.com> [Mon, 05 Jan 2015 22:18:55 -0800] rev 23734
cmdutil.jsonchangeset: properly compute added and removed files jsonchangeset._show() was computing the reverse status of the current changeset. As a result, added files were showing up as removed and removed files were showing up as adds. There were existing tests for this code and they were flat out wrong.
Wed, 31 Dec 2014 18:18:56 -0500 largefiles: convert addlargefiles() to vfs
Matt Harbison <matt_harbison@yahoo.com> [Wed, 31 Dec 2014 18:18:56 -0500] rev 23733
largefiles: convert addlargefiles() to vfs
Sun, 04 Jan 2015 01:29:07 +0100 rebase: clarify comment about merge ancestor when rebasing merges
Mads Kiilerich <madski@unity3d.com> [Sun, 04 Jan 2015 01:29:07 +0100] rev 23732
rebase: clarify comment about merge ancestor when rebasing merges The code for picking a merge ancestor when rebasing merges had a long and incorrect comment. The comment would perhaps have been fine as commit message but does not make the code more readable or maintainable and is a bad substitute for correct and readable code. The correct essense of the comment is quite trivial: a merge of an ancestor of the rebase destination and an 'outside' revision can be rebased as if it was a linear change, using 'destination ancestor parent' as base and pretty much ignoring the 'outside' revision. The code path where the comment is placed is however also used for other kinds of merge rebases. The comment is thus not really correct and not helpful. I think it would be better to drop the comment and rewrite the code.
(0) -10000 -3000 -1000 -300 -100 -30 -10 -7 +7 +10 +30 +100 +300 +1000 +3000 +10000 tip