Fri, 30 Jun 2017 23:58:59 -0700 changegroup: don't fail on empty changegroup (API)
Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz@google.com> [Fri, 30 Jun 2017 23:58:59 -0700] rev 33309
changegroup: don't fail on empty changegroup (API) I don't know why applying an empty changegroup should be an error. It seems harmless. I suspect the check was there to find code that creates empty changegroups just because that would be wasteful. Let's use develwarn() for that instead, so we catch any such cases that run with our test runner, but we still allow others to generate empty changegroups if they want to. We have run into this check at Google once or twice and had to work around it, but I'm changing this not so much because of that, but because it seems like it shouldn't be an error. I also changed the message slightly to be more modern ("changelog group" -> "changegroup") and more generic ("received" -> "applied").
Sat, 01 Jul 2017 00:00:09 -0700 changegroup: remove option to allow empty changegroup (API)
Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz@google.com> [Sat, 01 Jul 2017 00:00:09 -0700] rev 33308
changegroup: remove option to allow empty changegroup (API) No caller sets the "emptyok" option, so let's remove it.
Fri, 30 Jun 2017 23:58:31 -0700 strip: don't allow empty changegroup in bundle1
Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz@google.com> [Fri, 30 Jun 2017 23:58:31 -0700] rev 33307
strip: don't allow empty changegroup in bundle1 Applying an empty changegroup has been an error since the beginning. The only exception was strip, which would allow to apply an empty changegroup from the temporary bundle. However, the emptyok=True option was only set for bundle1 bundles. In other words, temporary bundle2 bundles would fail if they were empty. Bundle2 has now been used enough that it seems safe to say that we simply don't create bundle2 bundles with empty changegroups. That also suggests that we never create bundle1 bundles with empty changegroups (i.e. empty bundle1 bundles, since bundle1 is just a changegroup), because, AFAICT, the code leading up to the application of the bundle is the same for bundle1 and bundle2. Therefore, let's stop passing emptyok=True, so we more clearly get the same behavior for bundle1 and bundle2.
(0) -30000 -10000 -3000 -1000 -300 -100 -30 -10 -3 +3 +10 +30 +100 +300 +1000 +3000 +10000 tip