D3694: shelve: use more accurate description in conflict marker

[lothiraldan (Boris Feld)]

lothiraldan added a comment.


  > Interesting. I think I like this, it's a bummer that it requires a format bump in requires.
  
  
  
  - There are no format changes per-se, older client would preserve the phases for internal changesets, but have them visible,
  - This is also something we would need for obsshelve (non evolve enabled client complaining about markers),
  - There are more format bumps coming (when solving issue5480) and to other future series.
  
  > I'm a little anxious about defining the `internal` phase because it might restrict the potential for other phases past secret
  
  I kept things simple in the current series, but I had a similar thinking. One option is to encode the internal phase as "32" instead of "3" to leave us room for other phases. If we this we need to update the implementation with one of the following:
  
    (1) add 29 "reserved" empty phase that will remain empty.
    
    (2) rework the phases touching code to work on non-contiguous numbers.

REPOSITORY
  rHG Mercurial

REVISION DETAIL
  https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D3694

To: lothiraldan, #hg-reviewers
Cc: mercurial-devel