[PATCH 2 of 3 RFC] context: start the move of wlock from repo to workingctx

[Sean Farley]

Yuya Nishihara <yuya at tcha.org> writes:

> On Thu, 01 Jun 2017 11:28:56 -0700, Sean Farley wrote:
>> Yuya Nishihara <yuya at tcha.org> writes:
>> > On Wed, 31 May 2017 17:25:21 -0700, Sean Farley wrote:
>> >> # HG changeset patch
>> >> # User Sean Farley <sean at farley.io>
>> >> # Date 1494537056 25200
>> >> #      Thu May 11 14:10:56 2017 -0700
>> >> # Branch wctxds
>> >> # Node ID 11f1b897d1475648a88ff0115954413f46bf4137
>> >> # Parent  498dae194ccf1e82caed51a02e6ce0b77f8d92e8
>> >> context: start the move of wlock from repo to workingctx
>> >
>> > Does it mean eventually workingctx will never be created more than once
>> > per repository?
>> >
>> > Current context objects aren't persistent, but dirstate and wlock should
>> > be single source of truth.
>> 
>> I haven't crossed that bridge yet, but yes, I think something like that
>> would need to happen. If you have ideas about how that could happen (or
>> are against it), please do tell.
>
> My gut feeling is we'll need a storage object behind workingctx anyway, which
> is currently served by localrepository. Maybe it's good idea to detach
> dirstate, wlock, and the data guarded by wlock from localrepo, but the object
> holding them wouldn't be a workingctx.

Not a bad idea. I'll look into that this weekend.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 800 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.mercurial-scm.org/pipermail/mercurial-devel/attachments/20170602/f39bc267/attachment.sig>