Yuya Nishihara <y...@tcha.org> writes: > On Thu, 01 Jun 2017 11:28:56 -0700, Sean Farley wrote: >> Yuya Nishihara <y...@tcha.org> writes: >> > On Wed, 31 May 2017 17:25:21 -0700, Sean Farley wrote: >> >> # HG changeset patch >> >> # User Sean Farley <s...@farley.io> >> >> # Date 1494537056 25200 >> >> # Thu May 11 14:10:56 2017 -0700 >> >> # Branch wctxds >> >> # Node ID 11f1b897d1475648a88ff0115954413f46bf4137 >> >> # Parent 498dae194ccf1e82caed51a02e6ce0b77f8d92e8 >> >> context: start the move of wlock from repo to workingctx >> > >> > Does it mean eventually workingctx will never be created more than once >> > per repository? >> > >> > Current context objects aren't persistent, but dirstate and wlock should >> > be single source of truth. >> >> I haven't crossed that bridge yet, but yes, I think something like that >> would need to happen. If you have ideas about how that could happen (or >> are against it), please do tell. > > My gut feeling is we'll need a storage object behind workingctx anyway, which > is currently served by localrepository. Maybe it's good idea to detach > dirstate, wlock, and the data guarded by wlock from localrepo, but the object > holding them wouldn't be a workingctx.
Not a bad idea. I'll look into that this weekend.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Mercurial-devel mailing list Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
