pulkit added a comment.
I have not changed this patch much, just added a XXX, saying we should return a bundle from here. I changed https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D4813 to return a bundle2 instead of just sending the changegroup and added a patch on top of it for returning a bundle2 from the new function introduced in this patch. INLINE COMMENTS > martinvonz wrote in narrowbundle2.py:54 > > Since ellipses case will require sending a bundle not a changegroup > > I'm not sure it will require that. The point of the "known" set was initially > just to make sure that the server included all nodes that the client may have > local commits based off of (see [1] and [2]). But then we realized that it > would make more sense for widening and narrowing not to add or remove any > ellipsis nodes. When interacting with our Google-internal server, that's how > it actually works. I don't think I got around to making the core server > completely trust the "known" set (or just the "common" set when not using > ellipses), but I still think that's the right direction. > > Maybe we should still wrap the returned changegroup in a bundle so we have > more flexibility? It may be useful at least for letting the server include > messages for the client. It's hard to say what else we may want to include in > the bundle later. > > [1] > https://bitbucket.org/Google/narrowhg/commits/8c6dba960138b2758d6a37147d8338f751a7a05c > [2] > https://bitbucket.org/Google/narrowhg/commits/ba65a969df547df0ccf26901bb3c5bd4e21445f2 > since ellipses case will require sending a bundle not a changegroup I said that because there is a 'narrow:changespec' part being send from the server. I still need to understand the ellipses case more in detail but I agree that "known" set can be helpful. > Maybe we should still wrap the returned changegroup in a bundle so we have > more flexibility? It may be useful at least for letting the server include > messages for the client. It's hard to say what else we may want to include in > the bundle later. This was a very good suggestion, thanks! REPOSITORY rHG Mercurial REVISION DETAIL https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D4786 To: pulkit, durin42, #hg-reviewers, martinvonz Cc: martinvonz, mercurial-devel _______________________________________________ Mercurial-devel mailing list Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
