[PATCH] httpclient: update to 07d8c356f4d1 of py-nonblocking-http

Martin Geisler mg at lazybytes.net
Mon Oct 17 15:39:07 CDT 2011


Matt Mackall <mpm at selenic.com> writes:

> On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 12:38 +0200, Martin Geisler wrote:
>
>> I think we should acknowledge that core Mercurial now has an optional
>> runtime dependency on another Python library. It's a library that
>> we're shipping with Mercurial and one that we (as far as I know) aim
>> to make mandatory at some point when we trust it.
>>
>> Should we not incorporate it using the tools we have? We could make a
>> hg-build "super" repo that has mercurial and py-nonblocking-http as
>> subrepos, the important thing is that we (Matt and crew and other
>> Mercurial developers) begin using subrepos on a daily basis.
>
> Martin, what is going on here? Do you have early-onset dementia or
> similar? If so, let me know so I can calibrate my reactions
> accordingly. If not, I find this behavior unacceptable. I value your
> work, and I think you're a great hacker, but I'm not going to be able
> to work with you any more if this pattern doesn't change:
>
> - Martin makes argument X
> - Matt spends an hour responding with counterarguments A and B
> - thread dies and a month passes
> - Martin makes argument X, no mention of A or B
> - Matt spends more time responding with A, B, and C (now a little
> annoyed)
> - two months pass
> - Martin makes argument X, no mention of A, B or C
> - Matt responds with A, B, and C (now furious)
> - two months pass 
> - Martin makes argument X, no mention of any past counterarguments
> - Matt finally snaps and says "No, damnit!"
>
> ..and at this point to anyone not paying attention over months and
> months, Matt now looks like a tyrant. Also, he feels miserable and has
> high blood pressure.
>
> You have made exactly this argument here on this list multiple times
> (and at the last two sprints) and I have literally spent hours
> responding to it with no apparent effect. Your tactic appears to be
> "repeat the same argument and ignore the counterarguments until Matt
> gets tired of objecting". Sorry, but I'm just not going to let you win
> by wearing me down.

That's of course not my "plan" at all. Your counterpoints just don't
make much sense to me and so we end up talking past each other.

> If you want to have this argument, you need to do it like a reasonable
> person and actually respond to all the reasons I said we weren't going
> to do this the last N times. Here's a couple:
>
> http://markmail.org/message/ottfd4pc2jwh5hnp
> http://markmail.org/message/pape6tl6lfv4t7dv

You write that we should not bundle py-nonblocking-http inside the
Mercurial repository itself. Instead we should make

  mercurial-and-dependencies/
    Makefile <- whatever glue logic is required
    mercurial/ <- our current repo, without the httpclient/
    py-nonblocking-http/ <- your current repo, as is

That sound good to me and to acknowledge point that I wrote that we
could make a "super" repo.

You also very sensibly write that bundling dependencies is bad and we
should avoid it. I agree with that.

But my point is that we're already bundling libraries right now and
we're even doing it in a primitive and manual way.

Hmm, I just looked at the thread again and noticed that I tried to make
the same point here and that I did respond to your points:

  http://markmail.org/message/lofucrpbq2erajgp

The main benefit I see from this exercise is that we would force
ourselves to begin using subrepositories. You discount that argument as
being not important and are happy to rely on third-parties to provide
patches for subrepos. I feel that you think like that because we're not
using them ourselves. But I cannot provide any hard data to back that
belief.

> And this is the same pattern that's happening over here:
>
> http://markmail.org/message/arfyxwz6yetzihzw

I frankly didn't know how to respond... since I'm sure you know that I
know about your plan for "transparent commands". I'm really not trying
to trick you or anything -- I felt that the ui.recursesubrepos option
was a nice way to make commit/status/diff agree with each other, even
though it might be a temporary "hack" until we get transparent commands.

Did you even notice that I made tables for you? :-)

-- 
Martin Geisler

Mercurial links: http://mercurial.ch/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial-devel/attachments/20111017/8f23bc73/attachment.pgp>


More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list