Sun, 15 Jan 2012 13:50:12 -0700 hooks: prioritize run order of hooks
Matt Zuba <matt.zuba@goodwillaz.org> [Sun, 15 Jan 2012 13:50:12 -0700] rev 15896
hooks: prioritize run order of hooks As of Mercurial 1.3, hooks are sorted in the order they are read into Mercurial. There are many instances when someone may want the hooks sorted in a specific order; this patch allows prioritizing hooks, while maintaining the existing enumeration for hooks without a priority.
Sun, 15 Jan 2012 18:00:01 -0600 merge with stable
Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com> [Sun, 15 Jan 2012 18:00:01 -0600] rev 15895
merge with stable
Wed, 11 Jan 2012 15:53:42 -0500 merge: report all files in _checkunknown
Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso <jordigh@octave.org> [Wed, 11 Jan 2012 15:53:42 -0500] rev 15894
merge: report all files in _checkunknown When doing hg up, if there is a file conflict with untracked files, currently only the first such conflict is reported. With this patch, all of them are listed. With this patch error message is now reported as a: untracked file differs b: untracked file differs abort: untracked files in working directory conflict with files in requested revision instead of abort: untracked file in working directory differs from file in requested revision: 'a' This is a follow up to an old attempt to do this here: http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial-devel/2011-August/033625.html
Fri, 13 Jan 2012 22:16:01 +0100 discovery: fix prepush documentation
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@ens-lyon.org> [Fri, 13 Jan 2012 22:16:01 +0100] rev 15893
discovery: fix prepush documentation The prepush documentation claim that when we refuse to push, the second element of the returng tuple is an "outgoing" integer. value should be 0 when no outgoing changeset and 1 otherwise. In pratice if there are no outgoing changeset, "outgoing" value is alway 1 and util.Abort is raised on other error. the stable branch also include this error so it wasn't introduced by a recent refactoring.
Fri, 13 Jan 2012 02:04:16 +0100 phases: simplify phase exchange and movement over pushkey
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@ens-lyon.org> [Fri, 13 Jan 2012 02:04:16 +0100] rev 15892
phases: simplify phase exchange and movement over pushkey The code now only exchange draft root and only care about movement related to public//draft boundary. There is multiple reason to simplify this code: * Secret are never discovered anymore * We decided to not support more the three existing phase Removing phase index from pushkey (if ever decided) will be made in another commit.
Fri, 13 Jan 2012 01:42:47 +0100 phases: move phase according what was pushed not only what was added added
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@ens-lyon.org> [Fri, 13 Jan 2012 01:42:47 +0100] rev 15891
phases: move phase according what was pushed not only what was added added This fix the lack phase movement when a locally secret changeset without added children was pushed to the repository. In such case, this changeset would be present in the bundle source, but not in the ``added`` variable.
Fri, 13 Jan 2012 01:29:03 +0100 revlog: make addgroup returns a list of node contained in the added source
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@ens-lyon.org> [Fri, 13 Jan 2012 01:29:03 +0100] rev 15890
revlog: make addgroup returns a list of node contained in the added source This list will contains any node see in the source, not only the added one. This is intended to allow phase to be move according what was pushed by client not only what was added.
Thu, 12 Jan 2012 01:25:57 +0100 phases: make secret changeset undiscoverable in all case
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@ens-lyon.org> [Thu, 12 Jan 2012 01:25:57 +0100] rev 15889
phases: make secret changeset undiscoverable in all case This apply the redefined stronger semantic of secret. Secret changeset can still leak in various way. Those leak will need to be fixed individualy
Wed, 11 Jan 2012 17:26:27 +0100 phases: exclude secret when doing a local clone
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@logilab.fr> [Wed, 11 Jan 2012 17:26:27 +0100] rev 15888
phases: exclude secret when doing a local clone This is achieved by denying copy clone when any secret changeset exist.
Fri, 13 Jan 2012 02:30:43 +0100 bookmarks: primarily use repo lock, not wlock
Mads Kiilerich <mads@kiilerich.com> [Fri, 13 Jan 2012 02:30:43 +0100] rev 15887
bookmarks: primarily use repo lock, not wlock Bookmarks are repository data, not working directory data. Only the current bookmark is working directory data. Some lock shuffling is required to avoid lockout between the initial mock lock and locking of the localrepo instance that is created after copying.
(0) -10000 -3000 -1000 -300 -100 -10 +10 +100 +300 +1000 +3000 +10000 +30000 tip