[PATCH 5 of 6 V2 RFC] share: add "full share" suport

[Pierre-Yves David]

On 12/26/2014 03:46 AM, Angel Ezquerra wrote:
> # HG changeset patch
> # User Angel Ezquerra <angel.ezquerra at gmail.com>
> # Date 1419360788 -3600
> #      Tue Dec 23 19:53:08 2014 +0100
> # Node ID bb70464b9121df236db6d264d57b6f56ad78cd3b
> # Parent  dd180345dd166fc51d061a8041e014f320c20d6c
> share: add "full share" suport

I've been through the RFC, The vfs dispatcher is a bit scary and can 
probably be avoided, the multi locking is less scary and could be okay.

But this series ring some familiar bells. You are going through some 
dancing to handle "few key files that represent the working copy state". 
I've recently been thinking about how to move toward a newer repository 
format that would allow fully atomic transaction for new data type 
(phases, bookmarks, obsmarkers) and efficient sharing. One of the way to 
improve the situation is to improve "tagging". Knowing what file are 
critical for the transaction, which one depends/control the working copy 
etc.

In my current opinion, the best way to achieve this is to have distinct 
vfs object for distinct category of file. This would remove the needs 
for the unionvfs withcraft.

What do you think?

(note: there is various typo, all around your commit messages. I 
recommend running some spell checker on them)

-- 
Pierre-Yves David