quark accepted this revision.
quark added a comment.
I think this is fine as a workaround now. It's better than losing data.
INLINE COMMENTS
> test-context.py:185
> +with open('4', 'wb') as f:
> +f.write(i)
> +repo.dirstate.normal('4')
Seems like `f.write(b'4')` is better.
R
indygreg accepted this revision as: indygreg.
indygreg added a comment.
Aside from the test issue pointed out by @quark, I think this seems
reasonable.
@martinvonz is correct that writing the .i.a file has hooks implications. We
definitely need to keep the changes in memory.
I'm kin
martinvonz updated this revision to Diff 619.
martinvonz marked an inline comment as done.
REPOSITORY
rHG Mercurial
CHANGES SINCE LAST UPDATE
https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D152?vs=321&id=619
REVISION DETAIL
https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D152
AFFECTED FILES
mercurial/localrepo.py
tes
martinvonz added a comment.
Can this be queued for default now?
INLINE COMMENTS
> quark wrote in test-context.py:185
> Seems like `f.write(b'4')` is better.
Oops, definitely. I also updated the line above for consistency. I don't know
if other places should be updated, so I didn't.
REPOSIT
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rHG01a1c4e66816: repo: skip invalidation of changelog if it
has 'delayed' changes (API) (authored by martinvonz).
REPOSITORY
rHG Mercurial
CHANGES SINCE LAST UPDATE
https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D152?
martinvonz created this revision.
Herald added a subscriber: mercurial-devel.
Herald added a reviewer: hg-reviewers.
REVISION SUMMARY
The changelog object can store recently added revisions in memory
until the transaction is committed. We don't want to lose those
changes even if repo.invalid
quark added a comment.
Could we call `changelog._writepending()` automatically to solve this problem?
REPOSITORY
rHG Mercurial
REVISION DETAIL
https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D152
EMAIL PREFERENCES
https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/
To: martinvonz, #hg-revi
martinvonz added a comment.
In https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D152#2246, @quark wrote:
> Could we call `changelog._writepending()` automatically to solve this
problem?
Good question. I spent quite a lot of time trying to see if that would work.
It was easy to get all tests to pas
