fsmonitor: increase the threshold before we recommend it, when using rust 50k files works just fine with the rust status, and it's annoying to get told "consider using fsmonitor" when we have another solution to the status speed. 400k files was not chosen in any rigorous way. I know 200k files is fine. Twice as many files should still be fine. Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D9021

copy-tracing: test case where a merge reverted a file deletion This case is currently broken for commit centric copy tracing. So we add an official case for it with a note about it being broken. Fixing it will requires multiples change in code related to merge, commit and copy tracing, so we introduce it beforehand for simplicity. Also, I have been sitting on this test for 3 months so I would rather have it upstream.

copy-tracing: test case where we go across a changed/deleted merge This case is currently broken in the commit centric case. So we add an official case for it with a note about it being broken. Fixing it will requires multiples change in code related to merge, commit and copy tracing, so we introduce it beforehand for simplicity. Also, I have been sitting on this test for 3 months so I would rather have it upstream.

merge: show list of bids for each file in bid-merge in ui.debug() Earlier, we were showing the list of bids only when we were ambiguously picking. However, the cases where we unambiguously picked a side may not always be correct and need to be fixed. Having list of bids for all files will be helpful in debugging. Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D8966

merge with stable

cmdutil: reimplement finddate() without using walkchangerevs() It's simpler and slightly faster maybe because a fewer Python ops would run. Unscientific benchmark: $ python -m timeit \ -s 'from mercurial import hg, ui, cmdutil; repo = hg.repository(ui.ui())' \ 'cmdutil.finddate(repo.ui, repo, "<2008-01-01")' (orig) 10 loops, best of 3: 1.45 sec per loop (new) 10 loops, best of 3: 1.25 sec per loop Now "hg churn" and "hg grep" are the only users of walkchangerevs(), which I want to refactor and fix bugs.

test-simple-update: add test for -d DATE option I couldn't find any tests for cmdutil.finddate() except for the abort case.

largefiles: walk history in ascending order while downloading all lfiles I don't think the order matters. Maybe it's purely because of the use of walkchangerevs(), which was originally designed for "hg log" command. Surprisingly, the number of objects fetched in test-largefiles.t has changed. According to the --verbose output, the order of the following fetches flipped and the latter got deduplicated. getting large3:eb7338044dc27f9bc59b8dd5a246b065ead7a9c4 found eb7338044dc27f9bc59b8dd5a246b065ead7a9c4 in store getting sub/large4:eb7338044dc27f9bc59b8dd5a246b065ead7a9c4 found eb7338044dc27f9bc59b8dd5a246b065ead7a9c4 in store

largefiles: replace use of walkchangerevs() with simple revset query Since it does nothing in prepare(), what we're doing is just walking revisions matching ".hglf" in reverse order.

largefiles: remove unused 'rev' parameter from downloadlfiles() It's no longer used since 83ead8cb0ff2 "largefiles: implement pull --all-largefiles as a special case of --lfrev."