Pulkit Goyal <7895pulkit@gmail.com> [Tue, 21 Jul 2020 18:21:27 +0530] rev 45301
localrepo: abort creating a shared repo if the source does not have store
We cannot create a shared repository without a store IIUC. Let's abort in such
cases.
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D8772
Pulkit Goyal <7895pulkit@gmail.com> [Tue, 21 Jul 2020 13:58:58 +0530] rev 45300
localrepo: only use 'bookmarksinstore' requirement if we have 'store'
This adds check that whether we have the 'store' requirement or not. If we don't
have that, we skip adding the 'bookmarksinstore' requirement and warn user about
it.
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D8771
Pulkit Goyal <7895pulkit@gmail.com> [Sat, 25 Jul 2020 01:42:41 +0530] rev 45299
mergeresult: make actionmapping a dict of dict instead of dict of lists
This makes deleting a specific filename entry faster and easier.
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D8837
Pulkit Goyal <7895pulkit@gmail.com> [Sat, 25 Jul 2020 14:44:29 +0530] rev 45298
largefiles: introduce a constant for 'lfmr' action
It's better to use a dedicated constant instead of a string which makes pretty
less sense.
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D8836
Pulkit Goyal <7895pulkit@gmail.com> [Sat, 25 Jul 2020 14:41:20 +0530] rev 45297
largefiles: override merge.emptyactions() to include `lfmr`
I found it weird that we were not already doing this. I encountered this while
using `emptyactions()` in mergeresult() class.
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D8835
Pulkit Goyal <7895pulkit@gmail.com> [Sat, 25 Jul 2020 01:17:35 +0530] rev 45296
merge: unify logic of couple of if-else's in manifestmerge()
Right now manifestmerge() contains very nested if-else conditions and it's not
easy to understand what is happening. I was looking for easy unifications and
found these two.
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D8834
Pulkit Goyal <7895pulkit@gmail.com> [Fri, 24 Jul 2020 23:49:08 +0530] rev 45295
sparse: add comment for an if condition which I tried to refactor
I tried to refactor this if condition and make it part of the if-else above but
tests failed. I decided to add a comment about the check we are doing and why
it's a separate if.
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D8833