Sun, 24 May 2009 23:53:28 +0200 zsh-comp: explain how to use for non-global install
Martin Geisler <mg@lazybytes.net> [Sun, 24 May 2009 23:53:28 +0200] rev 8616
zsh-comp: explain how to use for non-global install
Sun, 24 May 2009 22:37:20 +0200 use ui instead of repo.ui when the former is in scope
Martin Geisler <mg@lazybytes.net> [Sun, 24 May 2009 22:37:20 +0200] rev 8615
use ui instead of repo.ui when the former is in scope
Sun, 24 May 2009 16:38:29 -0500 cmdutils: Take over glob expansion duties from util
Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com> [Sun, 24 May 2009 16:38:29 -0500] rev 8614
cmdutils: Take over glob expansion duties from util
Sun, 24 May 2009 16:37:34 -0500 match: fix _patsplit breakage with drive letters
Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com> [Sun, 24 May 2009 16:37:34 -0500] rev 8613
match: fix _patsplit breakage with drive letters
Sun, 24 May 2009 18:31:01 +0200 statichttprepo: handle remote not supporting Range headers
Patrick Mezard <pmezard@gmail.com> [Sun, 24 May 2009 18:31:01 +0200] rev 8612
statichttprepo: handle remote not supporting Range headers - If remote does not support Range header, 200 is answered instead of 206. The HTTPRangeHandler left these responses unchanged, so the data has to be sliced by the receiver. - httprangereader file pointer was not updated.
Sun, 24 May 2009 18:30:59 +0200 convert: better feedback when filtering out empty revisions
Patrick Mezard <pmezard@gmail.com> [Sun, 24 May 2009 18:30:59 +0200] rev 8611
convert: better feedback when filtering out empty revisions Original patch by Herbert Griebel <herbertg@gmx.at>
Thu, 21 May 2009 17:09:12 +0900 inotify: server: use a common 'pollable' interface for server & repowatcher
Nicolas Dumazet <nicdumz.commits@gmail.com> [Thu, 21 May 2009 17:09:12 +0900] rev 8610
inotify: server: use a common 'pollable' interface for server & repowatcher Mainly for documentation purposes: it easily explains the role of handle_event and handle_timeout, and why both server & repowatcher implement those methods.
Thu, 21 May 2009 19:26:15 +0900 inotify: process all inotify events in one batch
Nicolas Dumazet <nicdumz.commits@gmail.com> [Thu, 21 May 2009 19:26:15 +0900] rev 8609
inotify: process all inotify events in one batch When several inotify events happen, we don't have to process each event separately, calling everytime repowatcher.read_events() to fetch events from the underlying watcher: it is sufficient to call once read_events, to fetch all the events from the watcher.
Thu, 21 May 2009 19:22:29 +0900 inotify: rename handle_event to handle_pollevent to avoid confusion
Nicolas Dumazet <nicdumz.commits@gmail.com> [Thu, 21 May 2009 19:22:29 +0900] rev 8608
inotify: rename handle_event to handle_pollevent to avoid confusion event here refers to poll events, and are different from events read in server.read_events for example, where those events are inotify events.
Thu, 21 May 2009 16:54:05 +0900 inotify: handle_event: do not use event and fd parameters.
Nicolas Dumazet <nicdumz.commits@gmail.com> [Thu, 21 May 2009 16:54:05 +0900] rev 8607
inotify: handle_event: do not use event and fd parameters. event is particularly confusing given the context (is it an inotify event? a polling event?) and is never used. Remove it. fd has very little use, and it gives the false impression that event handling depends on fd. It's wrong: the same behavior is triggered, for all events.
Fri, 22 May 2009 10:26:56 +0900 inotify: use a decorator instead of dispatching calls
Nicolas Dumazet <nicdumz.commits@gmail.com> [Fri, 22 May 2009 10:26:56 +0900] rev 8606
inotify: use a decorator instead of dispatching calls
Fri, 22 May 2009 09:57:53 +0900 inotify: do not defer inotify events processing
Nicolas Dumazet <nicdumz.commits@gmail.com> [Fri, 22 May 2009 09:57:53 +0900] rev 8605
inotify: do not defer inotify events processing Doing a part of the event processing and deferring the rest is a bad habit: it complexifies the code, and it does not respect event ordering! Moreover, there is already a timeout handling, so that inotify events are only processed when a treshold is exceeded: there is no requirement to delay anymore the events processing.
Thu, 21 May 2009 15:55:58 +0900 inotify: do not recurse in handle_timeout(): call it explicitely, not in scan()
Nicolas Dumazet <nicdumz.commits@gmail.com> [Thu, 21 May 2009 15:55:58 +0900] rev 8604
inotify: do not recurse in handle_timeout(): call it explicitely, not in scan() When in handle_timeout, scan() is called when a repertory is created/modified. But the first line of scan calls handle_timeout. This had the consequence of calling recursively handle_timeout: * several calls to read_events (but only the first one retrieves events) * every time that an event is queued for a deferred action, the next time that scan() is called, handle_timeout is called, the event queue is treated, even if all the events haven't been read/queued yet. This could lead to inconsistencies
Sun, 24 May 2009 17:07:27 +0200 i18n-da: typo
Henrik Stuart <hg@hstuart.dk> [Sun, 24 May 2009 17:07:27 +0200] rev 8603
i18n-da: typo
Sun, 24 May 2009 16:33:22 +0200 merge with crew
Benoit Boissinot <benoit.boissinot@ens-lyon.org> [Sun, 24 May 2009 16:33:22 +0200] rev 8602
merge with crew
(0) -3000 -1000 -300 -100 -15 +15 +100 +300 +1000 +3000 +10000 +30000 tip