FUJIWARA Katsunori <foozy@lares.dti.ne.jp> [Tue, 01 Apr 2014 02:46:03 +0900] rev 20869
i18n: fix "% inside _()" problems
Before this patch, "contrib/check-code.py" can't detect these
problems, because the regexp pattern to detect "% inside _()" doesn't
suppose the case that format string consists of multiple string
components concatenated implicitly or explicitly,
This patch does below for that regexp pattern to detect "% inside _()"
problems in such case.
- put "+" into separator part ("[ \t\n]") for explicit concatenation
("...." + "...." style)
- enclose "component and separator" part by "(?:....)+" for
concatenation itself ("...." "...." or "...." + "....")
FUJIWARA Katsunori <foozy@lares.dti.ne.jp> [Tue, 01 Apr 2014 02:46:03 +0900] rev 20868
i18n: fix "% inside _()" problems
Before this patch, "contrib/check-code.py" can't detect these
problems, because the regexp pattern to detect "% inside _()" doesn't
suppose the case that the format string and "%" aren't placed in the
same line.
This patch replaces "\s" in that regexp pattern with "[ \t\n]" to
detect "% inside _()" problems in such case.
"[\s\n]" can't be used in this purpose, because "\s" is automatically
replaced with "[ \t]" by "_preparepats()" and "\s" in "[]" causes
nested "[]" unexpectedly.
FUJIWARA Katsunori <foozy@lares.dti.ne.jp> [Tue, 01 Apr 2014 02:46:03 +0900] rev 20867
merge: fix lack of "%s" in format string causing TypeError at runtime
Wagner Bruna <wbruna@softwareexpress.com.br> [Tue, 01 Apr 2014 13:27:12 -0300] rev 20866
i18n-pt_BR: synchronized with c57c9cece645
FUJIWARA Katsunori <foozy@lares.dti.ne.jp> [Mon, 31 Mar 2014 21:03:39 +0900] rev 20865
i18n-ja: synchronized with e259d4c462b5
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@fb.com> [Wed, 19 Mar 2014 23:04:03 -0700] rev 20864
bundle2: support unbundling empty part
We augment the unbundler to make it able to unbundle the empty part we are now
able to bundle.
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@fb.com> [Fri, 28 Mar 2014 17:00:13 -0700] rev 20863
revset: raise ValueError when calling min or max on empty smartset
min([]) raise a ValueError, we do the same thing in smartset.min() and
smartset.max() for the sake of consistency.
The min/amax test are greatly improved in the process to prevent this familly
of regression
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@fb.com> [Thu, 20 Mar 2014 18:44:25 -0700] rev 20862
revpair: smartset compatibility
Since recent revset changes, revrange now return a smartset. This smart set
probably does not support indexing (_addset does not). This led to crash.
Instead when the smartset is ordered we use the `min` and `max` method of
smart set. Otherwise we turn is into a list and use indexing on it.
The tests have been updated to catch such regression.
Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc@gmail.com> [Fri, 28 Mar 2014 16:12:05 -0700] rev 20861
revsetbenchmark: add entry for ::rev::
Revsets of the form ::rev:: were identified as the source behind the
regressions in issue 4201. Ensure we have explicit coverage of that
revset.
Kevin Bullock <kbullock@ringworld.org> [Mon, 31 Mar 2014 10:12:07 -0500] rev 20860
merge with stable
This should correct an earlier couple of bad merges (5433856b2558 and
596960a4ad0d, now pruned) that accidentally brought in a change that had
been marked obsolete (244ac996a821).