[PATCH 02 of 10 shelve-ext v4] shelve: add an ability to write key-val data to a new type of shelve files

Kostia Balytskyi kobalyts at outlook.com
Sat Mar 25 19:35:10 EDT 2017


On 21/03/2017 21:48, Augie Fackler wrote:

> On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 01:00:21PM -0800, Kostia Balytskyi wrote:
>> # HG changeset patch
>> # User Kostia Balytskyi <ikostia at fb.com>
>> # Date 1489186989 28800
>> #      Fri Mar 10 15:03:09 2017 -0800
>> # Node ID 13c8fb8e722fd0563a83e601bb784694535268f1
>> # Parent  ca01391d61f5725c4fc79ccffe0c8e2d6dbb97f0
>> shelve: add an ability to write key-val data to a new type of shelve files
>>
>> Obsolescense-based shelve only needs metadata stored in .hg/shelved
>> and if feels that this metadata should be stored in a
>> simplekeyvaluefile format for potential extensibility purposes.
>> I want to avoid storing it in an unstructured text file where
>> order of lines determines their semantical meanings (as now
>> happens in .hg/shelvedstate. .hg/rebasestate and I suspect other
>> state files as well).
>>
>> Not included in this series, I have ~30 commits, doubling test-shelve.t
>> in size and testing almost every tested shelve usecase for obs-shelve.
>> Here's the series for the curious now: http://pastebin.com/tGJKx0vM
>> I would like to send it to the mailing list and get accepted as well,
>> but:
>> 1. it's big, so should I send like 6 patches a time or so?
>> 2. instead of having a commit per test case, it more like
>>     a commit per some amount of copy-pasted code. I tried to keep
>>     it meaningful and named commits somewhat properly, but it is
>>     far from this list standards IMO. Any advice on how to get it
>>     in without turning it into a 100 commits and spending many
>>     days writing descriptions?
>> 3. it makes test-shelve.t run for twice as long (and it is already
>>     a slow test). Newest test-shelve.r runs for ~1 minute.
> Ouch. It might make sense to have a test-shelve-obs.t that is the
> parallel universe version, so they can run in parallel.

Can do. Should I send 1000+ lines patch or should I send a series of ~30 patches?
I can also try to split it into multiple series (which does not really make semantical
sense to me, but might make reviewing easier for people).

>> diff --git a/hgext/shelve.py b/hgext/shelve.py
>> --- a/hgext/shelve.py
>> +++ b/hgext/shelve.py
>> @@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ testedwith = 'ships-with-hg-core'
>>
>>   backupdir = 'shelve-backup'
>>   shelvedir = 'shelved'
>> -shelvefileextensions = ['hg', 'patch']
>> +shelvefileextensions = ['hg', 'patch', 'oshelve']
>>   # universal extension is present in all types of shelves
>>   patchextension = 'patch'
>>
>> @@ -154,6 +154,12 @@ class shelvedfile(object):
>>           bundle2.writebundle(self.ui, cg, self.fname, btype, self.vfs,
>>                                   compression=compression)
>>
>> +    def writeobsshelveinfo(self, info):
>> +        scmutil.simplekeyvaluefile(self.vfs, self.fname).write(info)
>> +
>> +    def readobsshelveinfo(self):
>> +        return scmutil.simplekeyvaluefile(self.vfs, self.fname).read()
>> +
>>   class shelvedstate(object):
>>       """Handle persistence during unshelving operations.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mercurial-devel mailing list
>> Mercurial-devel at mercurial-scm.org
>> https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
> _______________________________________________
> Mercurial-devel mailing list
> Mercurial-devel at mercurial-scm.org
> https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
>


More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list