martinvonz added a comment.
In https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255#92356, @mharbison72 wrote:
> This might break `--pure` without `--local` in the annotate tests. No idea
if that's a valid combination, but the buildbots (mostly) use that. In
fairness, it seems that this combination ha
mharbison72 added a comment.
This might break `--pure` without `--local` in the annotate tests. No idea
if that's a valid combination, but the buildbots (mostly) use that. In
fairness, it seems that this combination had an error where `_filecommit()` was
given too many arguments in the dir
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rHG57203e0210f8: copies: calculate mergecopies() based on
pathcopies() (authored by martinvonz, committed by ).
REPOSITORY
rHG Mercurial
CHANGES SINCE LAST UPDATE
https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255?v
martinvonz added a comment.
In https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255#91965, @martinvonz wrote:
> In https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255#91851, @martinvonz wrote:
>
> > I'll spend a bit more time to see if I can figure out why pathcopies()
and mergecopies() walk file ancestor different
martinvonz updated this revision to Diff 14964.
martinvonz edited the summary of this revision.
REPOSITORY
rHG Mercurial
CHANGES SINCE LAST UPDATE
https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255?vs=14943&id=14964
REVISION DETAIL
https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255
AFFECTED FILES
mercurial/copies.
martinvonz added a comment.
In https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255#91851, @martinvonz wrote:
> I'll spend a bit more time to see if I can figure out why pathcopies() and
mergecopies() walk file ancestor differently. The way mergecopies() does it is
faster, so I'l see if I can use that f
martinvonz updated this revision to Diff 14943.
martinvonz edited the summary of this revision.
REPOSITORY
rHG Mercurial
CHANGES SINCE LAST UPDATE
https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255?vs=14809&id=14943
REVISION DETAIL
https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255
AFFECTED FILES
mercurial/copies.
martinvonz planned changes to this revision.
martinvonz added a comment.
I'll spend a bit more time to see if I can figure out why pathcopies() and
mergecopies() walk file ancestor differently. The way mergecopies() does it is
faster, so I'l see if I can use that for pathcopies() too.
https:
martinvonz added a comment.
In https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255#91146, @martinvonz wrote:
> In https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255#91019, @martinvonz wrote:
>
> > In https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255#91015, @marmoute wrote:
> >
> > >
> >
> >
> > Since this seems the v
martinvonz updated this revision to Diff 14809.
REPOSITORY
rHG Mercurial
CHANGES SINCE LAST UPDATE
https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255?vs=14804&id=14809
REVISION DETAIL
https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255
AFFECTED FILES
mercurial/copies.py
tests/test-annotate.t
tests/test-copies.t
martinvonz updated this revision to Diff 14804.
martinvonz edited the summary of this revision.
REPOSITORY
rHG Mercurial
CHANGES SINCE LAST UPDATE
https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255?vs=14783&id=14804
REVISION DETAIL
https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255
AFFECTED FILES
mercurial/copies.
martinvonz added a comment.
In https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255#91019, @martinvonz wrote:
> In https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255#91015, @marmoute wrote:
>
> >
>
>
> The rest somehow didn't make it here, so I'll copy from the email (i.e. the
below is from Pierre-Yves, not
martinvonz added a comment.
From Pierre-Yves:
> Can you give that a shot with the two revisions we use in the benchmark
> suite, this is a pair expensive with the current algorithm.
>
> 1daa622bbe42 76caed42cf7c
Sure, it takes about 29 seconds with or without this patch. It s
On 4/16/19 11:08 PM, martinvonz (Martin von Zweigbergk) wrote:
martinvonz added a comment.
In https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255#91019, @martinvonz wrote:
> In https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255#91015, @marmoute wrote:
>
> > I did a first path through it, the new code see
martinvonz added a comment.
In https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255#91019, @martinvonz wrote:
> In https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255#91015, @marmoute wrote:
>
> > I did a first path through it, the new code seems reasonable and easier
> > to read than the previous one. Some comm
martinvonz added a comment.
Replying to just a few things now. Will reply to the rest later.
In https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255#91019, @martinvonz wrote:
> In https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255#91015, @marmoute wrote:
>
> > I did a first path through it, the new code seems
martinvonz added a comment.
In https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255#91019, @martinvonz wrote:
> In https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255#91015, @marmoute wrote:
>
> > I did a first path through it, the new code seems reasonable and easier
> > to read than the previous one. Some comm
martinvonz added a comment.
In https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255#91015, @marmoute wrote:
> I did a first path through it, the new code seems reasonable and easier
> to read than the previous one. Some comments and questions below.
The rest somehow didn't make it here, so I'l
On 4/16/19 9:02 PM, marmoute (Pierre-Yves David) wrote:
marmoute added a comment.
I did a first path through it, the new code seems reasonable and easier
to read than the previous one. Some comments and questions below.
The actual comments are visible here:
https://www.mercurial-sc
marmoute added a comment.
I did a first path through it, the new code seems reasonable and easier
to read than the previous one. Some comments and questions below.
REPOSITORY
rHG Mercurial
REVISION DETAIL
https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255
To: martinvonz, #hg-reviewers
Cc: marmoute,
I did a first path through it, the new code seems reasonable and easier
to read than the previous one. Some comments and questions below.
On 4/16/19 7:19 PM, martinvonz (Martin von Zweigbergk) wrote:
martinvonz created this revision.
Herald added subscribers: mercurial-devel, mjpieters.
Herald
martinvonz created this revision.
Herald added subscribers: mercurial-devel, mjpieters.
Herald added a reviewer: hg-reviewers.
REVISION SUMMARY
When copies are stored in changesets, we need a changeset-centric
version of mergecopies() just like we have a changeset-centric version
of pathcopi
22 matches
Mail list logo