| Submitter | Augie Fackler |
|---|---|
| Date | May 5, 2016, 2:56 a.m. |
| Message ID | <ef75c94c7e670127b18b.1462416964@augie-macbookair2.roam.corp.google.com> |
| Download | mbox | patch |
| Permalink | /patch/14890/ |
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
Comments
On Wed, 04 May 2016 22:56:04 -0400, Augie Fackler wrote: > # HG changeset patch > # User Augie Fackler <augie@google.com> > # Date 1462414190 14400 > # Wed May 04 22:09:50 2016 -0400 > # Node ID ef75c94c7e670127b18bcfeda68f13e3247d8a07 > # Parent 906a1c8a75fd8a18e43e8545eedcbe5222f84647 > test-obsolete: update extension in test to actually work The series looks good to me. Should we move the first 2 patches to stable?
On May 5, 2016 3:24 AM, "Yuya Nishihara" <yuya@tcha.org> wrote: > > On Wed, 04 May 2016 22:56:04 -0400, Augie Fackler wrote: > > # HG changeset patch > > # User Augie Fackler <augie@google.com> > > # Date 1462414190 14400 > > # Wed May 04 22:09:50 2016 -0400 > > # Node ID ef75c94c7e670127b18bcfeda68f13e3247d8a07 > > # Parent 906a1c8a75fd8a18e43e8545eedcbe5222f84647 > > test-obsolete: update extension in test to actually work > > The series looks good to me. Should we move the first 2 patches to stable? Fine with me. I debated that before sending.
I've pushed patch 1 and 2 on stable (replaced the global on patch1 with a weak ref) Patches 4 is pushed on default (with an API flag). Patch 3 waiting on a merge of stable into default. On 05/05/2016 02:03 PM, Augie Fackler wrote: > > > On May 5, 2016 3:24 AM, "Yuya Nishihara" <yuya@tcha.org > <mailto:yuya@tcha.org>> wrote: > > > > On Wed, 04 May 2016 22:56:04 -0400, Augie Fackler wrote: > > > # HG changeset patch > > > # User Augie Fackler <augie@google.com <mailto:augie@google.com>> > > > # Date 1462414190 14400 > > > # Wed May 04 22:09:50 2016 -0400 > > > # Node ID ef75c94c7e670127b18bcfeda68f13e3247d8a07 > > > # Parent 906a1c8a75fd8a18e43e8545eedcbe5222f84647 > > > test-obsolete: update extension in test to actually work > > > > The series looks good to me. Should we move the first 2 patches to > stable? > > Fine with me. I debated that before sending. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Mercurial-devel mailing list > Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org > https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
> On May 5, 2016, at 09:48, Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@ens-lyon.org> wrote: > > I've pushed patch 1 and 2 on stable (replaced the global on patch1 with a weak ref) > > Patches 4 is pushed on default (with an API flag). Patch 3 waiting on a merge of stable into default. Should I plan to re-mail patch 3 after a merge from stable, or are you holding on to it? > > On 05/05/2016 02:03 PM, Augie Fackler wrote: >> >> >> On May 5, 2016 3:24 AM, "Yuya Nishihara" <yuya@tcha.org <mailto:yuya@tcha.org>> wrote: >> > >> > On Wed, 04 May 2016 22:56:04 -0400, Augie Fackler wrote: >> > > # HG changeset patch >> > > # User Augie Fackler <augie@google.com <mailto:augie@google.com>> >> > > # Date 1462414190 14400 >> > > # Wed May 04 22:09:50 2016 -0400 >> > > # Node ID ef75c94c7e670127b18bcfeda68f13e3247d8a07 >> > > # Parent 906a1c8a75fd8a18e43e8545eedcbe5222f84647 >> > > test-obsolete: update extension in test to actually work >> > >> > The series looks good to me. Should we move the first 2 patches to stable? >> >> Fine with me. I debated that before sending. >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Mercurial-devel mailing list >> Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org >> https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel > > _______________________________________________ > Mercurial-devel mailing list > Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org > https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
Let's go for "no resend" It is still in patchwork so that we don't forgot about it. On 05/05/2016 03:51 PM, Augie Fackler wrote: >> On May 5, 2016, at 09:48, Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@ens-lyon.org> wrote: >> >> I've pushed patch 1 and 2 on stable (replaced the global on patch1 with a weak ref) >> >> Patches 4 is pushed on default (with an API flag). Patch 3 waiting on a merge of stable into default. > Should I plan to re-mail patch 3 after a merge from stable, or are you holding on to it? > >> On 05/05/2016 02:03 PM, Augie Fackler wrote: >>> >>> On May 5, 2016 3:24 AM, "Yuya Nishihara" <yuya@tcha.org <mailto:yuya@tcha.org>> wrote: >>>> On Wed, 04 May 2016 22:56:04 -0400, Augie Fackler wrote: >>>>> # HG changeset patch >>>>> # User Augie Fackler <augie@google.com <mailto:augie@google.com>> >>>>> # Date 1462414190 14400 >>>>> # Wed May 04 22:09:50 2016 -0400 >>>>> # Node ID ef75c94c7e670127b18bcfeda68f13e3247d8a07 >>>>> # Parent 906a1c8a75fd8a18e43e8545eedcbe5222f84647 >>>>> test-obsolete: update extension in test to actually work >>>> The series looks good to me. Should we move the first 2 patches to stable? >>> Fine with me. I debated that before sending. >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Mercurial-devel mailing list >>> Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org >>> https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel >> _______________________________________________ >> Mercurial-devel mailing list >> Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org >> https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
Patch
diff --git a/tests/test-obsolete.t b/tests/test-obsolete.t --- a/tests/test-obsolete.t +++ b/tests/test-obsolete.t @@ -984,15 +984,18 @@ bookmarks change $ cat >$TESTTMP/test_extension.py << EOF > from mercurial import cmdutil, extensions, bookmarks, repoview > def _bookmarkchanged(orig, bkmstoreinst, *args, **kwargs): + > global repo > repo = bkmstoreinst._repo - > ret = orig(bkmstoreinst, *args, **kwargs) + > repo.currenttransaction().addpostclose('test_extension', trhook) + > orig(bkmstoreinst, *args, **kwargs) + > def trhook(tr): > hidden1 = repoview.computehidden(repo) > hidden = repoview.filterrevs(repo, 'visible') > if sorted(hidden1) != sorted(hidden): > print "cache inconsistency" - > return ret > def extsetup(ui): - > extensions.wrapfunction(bookmarks.bmstore, 'write', _bookmarkchanged) + > extensions.wrapfunction(bookmarks.bmstore, 'recordchange', + > _bookmarkchanged) > EOF $ hg init repo-cache-inconsistency @@ -1005,14 +1008,20 @@ bookmarks change $ echo "hello" > b $ hg commit --amend -m "message" $ hg book bookb -r 13bedc178fce --hidden + cache inconsistency $ hg log -r 13bedc178fce 5:13bedc178fce (draft) [ bookb] add b $ hg book -d bookb + cache inconsistency $ hg log -r 13bedc178fce abort: hidden revision '13bedc178fce'! (use --hidden to access hidden revisions) [255] +Empty out the test extension, as it isn't compatible with later parts +of the test. + $ echo > $TESTTMP/test_extension.py + Test ability to pull changeset with locally applying obsolescence markers (issue4945)