Sun, 07 Feb 2016 21:44:38 -0800 treemanifest: fix debugrebuildfncache
Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz@google.com> [Sun, 07 Feb 2016 21:44:38 -0800] rev 28031
treemanifest: fix debugrebuildfncache When I taught debugrebuildfncache about dirlogs in fb92927f9775 (treemanifests: fix streaming clone, 2016-02-04), I added a last-minute "if 'treemanifest' in repo" guard. That should have been checking for "... in repo.requirements". Fix that and add tests for it.
Wed, 03 Feb 2016 15:12:01 +0000 update: warn about other topological head in pull and unbundle
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@fb.com> [Wed, 03 Feb 2016 15:12:01 +0000] rev 28030
update: warn about other topological head in pull and unbundle Other commands have a '--update' triggering a bare update. We now issue the message introduced into the previous changeset for these too.
Tue, 02 Feb 2016 14:49:02 +0000 update: warn about other topological heads on bare update
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@fb.com> [Tue, 02 Feb 2016 14:49:02 +0000] rev 28029
update: warn about other topological heads on bare update A concern around the user experience of Mercurial is user getting stuck on there own topological branch forever. For example, someone pulling another topological branch, missing that message in pull asking them to merge and getting stuck on there own local branch. The current way to "address" this concern was for bare 'hg update' to target the tipmost (also latest pulled) changesets and complain when the update was not linear. That way, failure to merge newly pulled changesets would result in some kind of failure. Yet the failure was quite obscure, not working in all cases (eg: commit right after pull) and the behavior was very impractical in the common case (eg: issue4673). To be able to change that behavior, we need to provide other ways to alert a user stucks on one of many topological head. We do so with an extra message after bare update: 1 other heads for branch "default" Bookmark get its own special version: 1 other divergent bookmarks for "foobar" There is significant room to improve the message itself, and we should augment it with hint about how to see theses other heads or handle the situation (see in-line comment). But having "a" message is already a significant improvement compared to the existing situation. Once we have it we can iterate on a better version of it. As having such message is an important step toward changing the default destination for update and other nicety, I would like to move forward quickly on getting such message. This was discussed during London - October 2015 Sprint.
Wed, 03 Feb 2016 04:37:04 +0000 tests: mock getpid to reduce glob usage
timeless <timeless@mozdev.org> [Wed, 03 Feb 2016 04:37:04 +0000] rev 28028
tests: mock getpid to reduce glob usage With util.getpid, it is now possible to define fixed pids. Future iterations can define a map of pids on a locked first come first serve basis to create a more realistic harness, but for now this is good enough. This applies to blackbox, but could apply to other tests as well.
Wed, 03 Feb 2016 09:11:22 +0000 util: enable getpid to be replaced
timeless <timeless@mozdev.org> [Wed, 03 Feb 2016 09:11:22 +0000] rev 28027
util: enable getpid to be replaced This will enable tests to write stable process ids.
Mon, 08 Feb 2016 00:47:36 +0000 blackbox: refactor use of vfs as _bbvfs
timeless <timeless@mozdev.org> [Mon, 08 Feb 2016 00:47:36 +0000] rev 28026
blackbox: refactor use of vfs as _bbvfs
Wed, 03 Feb 2016 15:18:29 +0000 blackbox: flush output file descriptor
timeless <timeless@mozdev.org> [Wed, 03 Feb 2016 15:18:29 +0000] rev 28025
blackbox: flush output file descriptor Without this, when there are multiple ui views, each blackbox will have its own file handle, and the logging will be in a really bad order. Also, because of the way blackbox works, it never closes its file handles, which means the last output before exit is often lost.
Wed, 03 Feb 2016 18:15:18 +0000 tests: change blackbox test to work cross platform
timeless <timeless@mozdev.org> [Wed, 03 Feb 2016 18:15:18 +0000] rev 28024
tests: change blackbox test to work cross platform While it is not easy to make a file 000 on Windows, you can emulate most of the behaviors by replacing the file with a directory. Also corrects test description to properly indicate that failing to read from the log is fatal.
Mon, 01 Feb 2016 20:28:32 -0800 merge: document checkignored and checkunknown configs again
Siddharth Agarwal <sid0@fb.com> [Mon, 01 Feb 2016 20:28:32 -0800] rev 28023
merge: document checkignored and checkunknown configs again These options were undocumented for 3.7 because of an issue found during the freeze (see rev 7cb7264cfd52). This issue has now been fixed, so we can document these options again.
Wed, 03 Feb 2016 13:12:06 -0800 rebase: respect checkunknown and checkignored in more cases
Siddharth Agarwal <sid0@fb.com> [Wed, 03 Feb 2016 13:12:06 -0800] rev 28022
rebase: respect checkunknown and checkignored in more cases checkunknown and checkignored are currently respected for updates and regular merges, but not for certain kinds of rebases. To be precise, they aren't respected for rebases when: (1) we're rebasing while currently on the destination commit, and (2) an untracked or ignored file F is currently in the working copy, and (3) the same file F is in a source commit, and (4) F has different contents in the source commit. This happens because rebases set force to True when calling merge.update. Setting force to True makes a lot of sense in general, but it turns out the force option is overloaded: there's a deprecated '--force' option in merge that allows you to merge in outstanding changes, including changes in untracked files. We use the 'mergeforce' parameter to tell those two cases apart. I think the behavior during rebases when checkunknown is 'abort' (the default) is wrong -- we should abort on or overwrite differing untracked files, not try to merge them in. However that currently breaks rebases by aborting in the middle -- we need better handling for that case before we can change the default.
Wed, 03 Feb 2016 13:11:34 -0800 test-merge-force: add tests for merge.checkunknown=warn
Siddharth Agarwal <sid0@fb.com> [Wed, 03 Feb 2016 13:11:34 -0800] rev 28021
test-merge-force: add tests for merge.checkunknown=warn In an upcoming patch we're going to change the behavior of some merges with merge.checkunknown=warn or ignore -- ensure that the behavior of the deprecated 'merge --force' remains the same.
Mon, 01 Feb 2016 20:28:32 -0800 merge: tell _checkunknownfiles about whether this was merge --force
Siddharth Agarwal <sid0@fb.com> [Mon, 01 Feb 2016 20:28:32 -0800] rev 28020
merge: tell _checkunknownfiles about whether this was merge --force In an upcoming patch we'll have different behavior here for when 'merge --force' is used as opposed to when other kinds of force operations are performed, like rebases.
Mon, 01 Feb 2016 20:28:32 -0800 merge: add missing doc for 'labels' parameter
Siddharth Agarwal <sid0@fb.com> [Mon, 01 Feb 2016 20:28:32 -0800] rev 28019
merge: add missing doc for 'labels' parameter
Mon, 01 Feb 2016 20:28:32 -0800 merge: move abort/warn checks up to the top level of _checkunknownfiles
Siddharth Agarwal <sid0@fb.com> [Mon, 01 Feb 2016 20:28:32 -0800] rev 28018
merge: move abort/warn checks up to the top level of _checkunknownfiles In upcoming patches, we're also going to do these checks when force is True.
Fri, 05 Feb 2016 21:09:32 -0800 match: rename "narrowmatcher" to "subdirmatcher" (API)
Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz@google.com> [Fri, 05 Feb 2016 21:09:32 -0800] rev 28017
match: rename "narrowmatcher" to "subdirmatcher" (API) I keep mistaking "narrowmatcher" for narrowhg's narrowmatcher. "subdirmatcher" seems more to the point anyway.
(0) -10000 -3000 -1000 -300 -100 -15 +15 +100 +300 +1000 +3000 +10000 tip