Comments
Patch
@@ -742,7 +742,8 @@
audit(f)
util.unlinkpath(repo.wjoin(f))
- numupdates = sum(len(l) for m, l in actions.items() if m != 'k')
+ numupdates = sum(len(l) for m, l in actions.items()
+ if m not in ('k', 'dr', 'rd'))
if [a for a in actions['r'] if a[0] == '.hgsubstate']:
subrepo.submerge(repo, wctx, mctx, wctx, overwrite)
@@ -825,9 +826,6 @@
# divergent renames
for f, args, msg in actions['dr']:
- repo.ui.debug(" %s: %s -> dr\n" % (f, msg))
- z += 1
- progress(_updating, z, item=f, total=numupdates, unit=_files)
fl, = args
repo.ui.warn(_("note: possible conflict - %s was renamed "
"multiple times to:\n") % f)
@@ -836,9 +834,6 @@
# rename and delete
for f, args, msg in actions['rd']:
- repo.ui.debug(" %s: %s -> rd\n" % (f, msg))
- z += 1
- progress(_updating, z, item=f, total=numupdates, unit=_files)
fl, = args
repo.ui.warn(_("note: possible conflict - %s was deleted "
"and renamed to:\n") % f)
@@ -40,15 +40,13 @@
removing a
b2: remote created -> g
getting b2
- updating: b2 1/3 files (33.33%)
+ updating: b2 1/2 files (50.00%)
b: remote moved from a -> m
- updating: b 2/3 files (66.67%)
+ updating: b 2/2 files (100.00%)
picked tool 'internal:merge' for b (binary False symlink False)
merging a and b to b
my b@044f8520aeeb+ other b@85c198ef2f6c ancestor a@af1939970a1c
premerge successful
- a2: divergent renames -> dr
- updating: a2 3/3 files (100.00%)
note: possible conflict - a2 was renamed multiple times to:
c2
b2
@@ -183,9 +181,7 @@
ancestor: 19d7f95df299, local: 0084274f6b67+, remote: 5d32493049f0
newfile: remote created -> g
getting newfile
- updating: newfile 1/2 files (50.00%)
- file: rename and delete -> rd
- updating: file 2/2 files (100.00%)
+ updating: newfile 1/1 files (100.00%)
note: possible conflict - file was deleted and renamed to:
newfile
1 files updated, 0 files merged, 0 files removed, 0 files unresolved
@@ -382,14 +382,12 @@
preserving rev for resolve of rev
c: remote created -> g
getting c
- updating: c 1/3 files (33.33%)
+ updating: c 1/2 files (50.00%)
rev: versions differ -> m
- updating: rev 2/3 files (66.67%)
+ updating: rev 2/2 files (100.00%)
picked tool 'python ../merge' for rev (binary False symlink False)
merging rev
my rev@02963e448370+ other rev@fe905ef2c33e ancestor rev@924404dff337
- a: divergent renames -> dr
- updating: a 3/3 files (100.00%)
note: possible conflict - a was renamed multiple times to:
b
c
# HG changeset patch # User Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz@google.com> # Date 1417824806 28800 # Fri Dec 05 16:13:26 2014 -0800 # Node ID 53e54ae19ff275421e4103724a28ac2773e5f952 # Parent 3575f42e1b7b174f46f1c69951526d410452abf4 merge: don't report progress for dr/rd actions It is easier to reason about certain algorithms in terms of a file->action mapping than the current action->list-of-files. Bid merge is already written this way (but with a list of actions per file), and largefiles' overridecalculateupdates() will also benefit. However, that requires us to have at most one action per file. That requirement is currently violated by 'dr' (divergent rename) and 'rd' (rename and delete) actions, which can exist for the same file as some other action. These actions are only used for displaying warnings to the user; they don't change anything in the working copy or the dirstate. In this way, they are similar to the 'k' (keep) action. However, they are even less action-like than 'k' is: 'k' at least describes what to do with the file ("do nothing"), while 'dr' and 'rd' or only annotations for files for which there may exist other, "real" actions. As a first step towards separating these acitons out, stop including them in the progress output, just like we already exclude the 'k' action.