durin42 added inline comments. INLINE COMMENTS
> martinvonz wrote in test-status.t:112 > We had a more extreme case of "entire working directory is untracked" in our > internal tests. It was something like this > > $ dir=foo/bar/baz/qux > $ mkdir -p $dir > $ cd $dir > $ echo stuff > file > $ hg st > ? file > > After this patch (we have tweakdefaults turned on internally), the output is > instead this: > > $ hg st > ../../../../ > > It's correct, but it's much less readable than the old output. Git does the > same thing (it also shows `../../../../`), btw. > > Maybe we shouldn't terse-ify the files in the current working directory? I > understand how treating the working directory differently is not very > appealing. Note that with both hg and git, if you add a file in the root > directory of an empty repo, then the filename will still be printed (it > doesn't just say `.`). > > Consider an empty repo with these paths: > > dir/subdir/subdir/a > dir/subdir/b > c > > If you're in the root directory, I think we all expect to get this: > > ? dir/ > ? c > > How about when you're in `dir/subdir`? We currently get this: > > ? ../ > ? ../../c > > Perhaps it's better to display this? > > ? subdir/ > ? b > ? ../../c > > That seems consistent with not abbreviating the root directory's entries to > just '.'. > > It still gets weird when you're in dir/subdir/subdir/. Should we show this? > > ? a > ? ../b > ? ../../../c > > Thoughts? Yeah, that sounds reasonable. I think in general the tersed behavior is better, but this is an annoying edge case. Could you at least send a patch that introduces a "we'd rather we saw this output?" kind of test? REPOSITORY rHG Mercurial REVISION DETAIL https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D3628 To: durin42, #hg-reviewers, pulkit Cc: spectral, martinvonz, mercurial-devel _______________________________________________ Mercurial-devel mailing list Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
