Phil Cohen <phillco@fb.com> [Wed, 15 Nov 2017 21:07:30 -0800] rev 35105
error: add InMemoryMergeConflictsError
We'll raise this exception in the merge code, and in-memory users like rebase
can catch it and retry without IMM.
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D1210
Augie Fackler <augie@google.com> [Mon, 20 Nov 2017 18:05:15 -0500] rev 35104
lfs: generate a large file by using `python` instead of yes | head
yes(1) on some systems (like gcc112) feels compelled to inform you of
broken pipes, such as those triggered by head(1). This works around
the problem portably.
Augie Fackler <augie@google.com> [Mon, 20 Nov 2017 18:00:02 -0500] rev 35103
setup: add hgext.lfs to list of Python packages
This is needed for lfs to get installed. Probably could stand to go
into an earlier patch, but I just want to get this stuff pushed.
Matt Harbison <matt_harbison@yahoo.com> [Sat, 18 Nov 2017 12:54:06 -0500] rev 35102
test-lfs: add tests demonstrating the interaction with largefiles
Obviously the original series needs to be accepted first, but there are concerns
about how well these extensions will play together before proceeding. It looks
like the answer is surprisingly well. There are some merge surprises
(largefiles seems to combine the choice of "keep tracking as a large/normal
file" with taking the content of the large/normal file) and some existing diff
weirdness (largefiles diffs the standins, not the large file). Converting the
repo to normal files seemlessly transitions to lfs on the fly. I didn't test
going the other way, because I'm not sure why anyone would want to do that.
I flagged the lack of a repo requirement after converting, because some of the
unsubmitted changes I have add a requirement on commit, but this somehow misses
the convert case.
I flagged an issue where devel-warnings are emitted on convert, which is a
separate issue.
Matt Harbison <matt_harbison@yahoo.com> [Tue, 14 Nov 2017 01:09:48 -0500] rev 35101
test-lfs: cast the flags printed to an int
On Windows, the flag values in the subsequent tests were printing with a 'L'
suffix.
Matt Harbison <matt_harbison@yahoo.com> [Tue, 14 Nov 2017 01:03:22 -0500] rev 35100
lfs: register config options
I'm not sure at what point we can get rid of the deprecated options, but for the
sake of making progress, they are registered too.
Matt Harbison <matt_harbison@yahoo.com> [Tue, 14 Nov 2017 00:14:52 -0500] rev 35099
lfs: quiesce check-module-import warnings
Specifically, 'symbol import follows non-symbol import: mercurial.i18n'
Matt Harbison <matt_harbison@yahoo.com> [Tue, 14 Nov 2017 00:06:23 -0500] rev 35098
lfs: import the Facebook git-lfs client extension
The purpose of this is the same as the built-in largefiles extension- to handle
huge files outside of the normal storage system, generally to keep the amount of
data cloned to a lower amount. There are several benefits of implementing the
git-lfs protocol, instead of using the largefiles extension:
- Bitbucket and Github support (and probably wider support in 3rd party
hosting sites in general). [1][2]
- The number of hg internals monkey patched are several orders of magnitude
lower, so it will be easier to reason about and maintain. Future commands
will likely just work, without requiring various wrappers.
- The "standin" files are only written to the filelog, not the disk. That
should avoid weird edge cases where the largefile and standin files get out
of sync. [3] It also avoids the occasional printing of the "hidden" standin
file in various messages.
- Filesets like size() will work, even if the file isn't present. (It always
says 41 bytes for largefiles, whether present or not.)
The only place that I see where largefiles comes out on top is that it works
with `hg serve` for simple sharing, without external infrastructure. Getting
lfs-test-server working was a hassle, and took awhile to figure out. Maybe we
can do something to make it work in the future.
Long term, I expect that this will be highly preferred over largefiles. But if
we are to recommend this to largefile users, there are some UI issues to
bikeshed. Until they are resolved, I've marked this experimental, and am not
putting a pointer to this in the largefiles help. The (non exhaustive) list of
issues I've seen so far are:
- It isn't sufficient to just enable the largefiles extension- you have to
explicitly add a file with --large before it will pay attention to the
configured sizes and patterns on future adds. The justification being that
once you use it, you're stuck with it. I've seen people confused by this,
and haven't liked it myself. But it's also saved me a few times. Should we
do something like have a specific enabling config setting that must be set
in the local repo config, so that enabling this extension in the user or
system hgrc doesn't silently start storing lfs files?
- The largefiles extension adds a repo requirement when the first largefile is
committed, so that the extension must always be enabled in the future. This
extension is not doing that, and since I only enabled it locally to avoid
infecting other repos, I got a cryptic error about missing flag processors
when I cloned. Is there no repo requirement due to shallow/narrow clone
considerations (or other future advanced things)?
- In the (small amount of) reading I've done about the git implementation, it
seems that the files and sizes are stored in a tracked .gitattributes file.
I think a tracked file for this would be extremely useful for consistency
across developers, but this kind of touches on the tracked hgrc file
proposal a few months back.
- The git client can specify file patterns, not just sizes.
- The largefiles extension has a cache directory in the local repo, but also a
system wide one. We should probably implement a system wide cache too, so
that multiple clones don't have to refetch the files from the server.
- Jun mentioned other missing features, like SSH authentication, gc, etc.
The code corresponds to
c0492b73c7ef in hg-experimental. [4] The only tweaks
are to load the extension in the tests with 'lfs=' instead of
'lfs=$TESTDIR/../hgext3rd/lfs', change the import in the *.py test to hgext
(from hgext3rd), add the 'testedwith' declaration, and mark it experimental for
now. The infinite-push, p4fastimport, and remotefilelog tests were left behind.
The devel-warnings for unregistered config options are not corrected yet, nor
are the import check warnings.
[1] https://www.mercurial-scm.org/pipermail/mercurial/2017-November/050699.html
[2] https://bitbucket.org/site/master/issues/3843/largefiles-support-bb-3903
[3] https://bz.mercurial-scm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5738
[4] https://bitbucket.org/facebook/hg-experimental
Matthieu Laneuville <matthieu.laneuville@octobus.net> [Sat, 18 Nov 2017 16:12:00 +0900] rev 35097
run-tests: outputdir also has to be changed if $TESTDIR is not $PWD
Following
a18eef03d879, running run-tests.py from outside tests/ would lead to
the creation of .testtimes and test-*.t.err in $PWD instead of $TESTDIR. This
patch fixes that and updates the relevant test.
Anton Shestakov <av6@dwimlabs.net> [Mon, 20 Nov 2017 21:59:00 +0800] rev 35096
hgweb: use webutil.commonentry() for nodes (but not for jsdata yet) in /graph
This makes graphdata() simpler by using existing code that gets common
changeset properties for showing in hgweb. graphdata() is a nested function in
graph() that prepares entries for /graph view, but there are two different
lists of changesets prepared: "jsdata" for JavaScript-rendered graph and
"nodes" for everything else.
For "jsdata", properties "node", "user", "age" and "desc" are passed through
various template filters because we don't have these filters in JavaScript, so
the data has to be prepared server-side. But now that commonentry() is used for
producing "nodes" list (and it doesn't apply any filters), these filters need
to be added to the appropriate templates (only raw at this moment, everything
else either doesn't implement graph or uses JavaScript).
This is a bit of refactoring that will hopefully simplify future patches. The
end result is to have /graph that only renders the actual graph with nodes and
vertices in JavaScript, and the rest is done server-side. This way server-side
code can focus on showing a list of changesets, which is easy because we
already have /log, /shortlog, etc, and JavaScript code can be simplified,
making it easier to add obsolescence graph and other features.