[PATCH 4 of 4 stable] PROOF OF CONCEPT: introduce lock validation

[Mads Kiilerich]

On 14/05/12 01:06, Christian Ebert wrote:
> * Mads Kiilerich on Saturday, May 12, 2012 at 20:37:46 +0200
>> diff --git a/hgext/keyword.py b/hgext/keyword.py
>> --- a/hgext/keyword.py
>> +++ b/hgext/keyword.py
>> @@ -436,7 +436,11 @@
>>      repo[None].add([fn])
>>      ui.note(_('\nkeywords written to %s:\n') % fn)
>>      ui.note(keywords)
>> -    repo.dirstate.setbranch('demobranch')
>> +    wlock = repo.wlock()
>> +    try:
>> +        repo.dirstate.setbranch('demobranch')
>> +    finally:
>> +        wlock.release()
>
> Are you sure this is needed? I can't think of a situation where
> the temporary kwdemo repo suffers from concurrent write access.
> otoh, better safe than sorry.

This missing lock shows up when validating locking, and I had to spend 
time validating that the warning was correct - I don't want to do that 
every time I run the validation. It is not feasible to maintain that 
kwdemo is a low quality area of the Mercurial code base with known bugs.

But I really can't think of a situation where the kwdemo has any 
relevance as a built-in command at all. I think it would be more 
suitable as a .py test - and more useful for the user as a more verbose 
example in the documentation (which however already is quite long) or on 
the wiki.

/Mads