D6440: fix: let fixer tools inherit hg's cwd so they can look at the working copy

Closed by commit rHG74b4cd091e0d: fix: run fixer tools in the repo root as cwd so they can use the working copy (authored by hooper). This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. This revision was not accepted when it landed; it landed in state "Needs Review". CHANGE

D6440: fix: let fixer tools inherit hg's cwd so they can look at the working copy

durin42 added a comment. Queued with updated log message. Thanks! REPOSITORY rHG Mercurial CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6440/new/ REVISION DETAIL https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6440 To: hooper, #hg-reviewers Cc: martinvonz, durin42, mercurial-devel __

D6440: fix: let fixer tools inherit hg's cwd so they can look at the working copy

hooper added a comment. In D6440#97422 , @durin42 wrote: > I still think we should fix the cwd for fixers, but it seems Martin and I agree that repo-root is more consistent. Would you be willing to reroll with repo-root instead of cwd? Don

D6440: fix: let fixer tools inherit hg's cwd so they can look at the working copy

hooper updated this revision to Diff 16083. REPOSITORY rHG Mercurial CHANGES SINCE LAST UPDATE https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6440?vs=15244&id=16083 CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6440/new/ REVISION DETAIL https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6440 AFFECTED FILES

D6440: fix: let fixer tools inherit hg's cwd so they can look at the working copy

durin42 added a comment. I still think we should fix the cwd for fixers, but it seems Martin and I agree that repo-root is more consistent. Would you be willing to reroll with repo-root instead of cwd? REPOSITORY rHG Mercurial CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D64

D6440: fix: let fixer tools inherit hg's cwd so they can look at the working copy

martinvonz added inline comments. INLINE COMMENTS > durin42 wrote in fix.py:106 > Hm. Is {root} in the templater for the command? Maybe have a sample in the > test demonstrating that? > > I'm still dubious that cwd is the right thing, simply because it's > unpredictable. I could see $(dirname

D6440: fix: let fixer tools inherit hg's cwd so they can look at the working copy

durin42 added inline comments. INLINE COMMENTS > hooper wrote in fix.py:106 > It depends on whether we want to make it easier for tools that want to > examine the tree upward from the cwd or tools that want to examine the tree > downward from the root. I suspect that "upward" will be more impor

D6440: fix: let fixer tools inherit hg's cwd so they can look at the working copy

hooper added inline comments. INLINE COMMENTS > durin42 wrote in fix.py:106 > I wonder if it'd be more generally useful to run the fixer in the repo root > than the same `pwd` as the command invocation. WDYT? It depends on whether we want to make it easier for tools that want to examine the tr

D6440: fix: let fixer tools inherit hg's cwd so they can look at the working copy

durin42 added inline comments. INLINE COMMENTS > fix.py:106 > + > +Fixer tools are run the in same working directory as the :hg:`fix` command. > This > +allows them to read configuration files from the working copy, or even write > to I wonder if it'd be more generally useful to run the fixer

D6440: fix: let fixer tools inherit hg's cwd so they can look at the working copy

hooper created this revision. Herald added a subscriber: mercurial-devel. Herald added a reviewer: hg-reviewers. REVISION SUMMARY This lets fixer tools do things like find configuration files, with the caveat that they'll only see the version of that file in the working copy, regardless of w