[PATCH 04 of 14 "] pull: deal with locally filtered changeset passed into --rev

[Gregory Szorc]

On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 5:56 PM Pierre-Yves David <
pierre-yves.david at ens-lyon.org> wrote:

> # HG changeset patch
> # User Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david at octobus.net>
> # Date 1554472565 -7200
> #      Fri Apr 05 15:56:05 2019 +0200
> # Node ID 0adcfded9b03fff84190594ef29e37110967419f
> # Parent  d5f42ea7b06825ee86620cdc18aaa3a53504bff5
> # EXP-Topic hgweb-obsolete
> # Available At https://bitbucket.org/octobus/mercurial-devel/
> #              hg pull https://bitbucket.org/octobus/mercurial-devel/ -r
> 0adcfded9b03
> pull: deal with locally filtered changeset passed into --rev
>
> Nowadays, it is possible to explicitly pull a remote revision that end up
> being
> hidden locally (eg: obsoleted locally). However before this patch, some
> internal processing where crashing trying to resolve a filtered revision.
>
> Without this patches, the pull output result a confusing output:
>
>   $ hg pull ../repo-Bob --rev 956063ac4557
>   pulling from ../repo-Bob
>   searching for changes
>   adding changesets
>   adding manifests
>   adding file changes
>   added 2 changesets with 0 changes to 2 files (+1 heads)
>   (2 other changesets obsolete on arrival)
>   abort: 00changelog.i at 956063ac4557828781733b2d5677a351ce856f59: filtered
> node!
>

The existing abort message is bad and should be improved because typical
users won't have a clue what it means.

But I have reservations about this patch because it isn't clear what will
happen with `pull -u -r <hidden>`. If the working directory will be updated
to a hidden revision without --hidden specified, this feels wrong to me.

Could we get test coverage showing what happens in this case? Please also
check for behavior with `hg clone -r <hidden>` and `hg clone -u <rev>` as
well.

Also, I'm a little confused about "checkout" and "brev" both doing similar
things. It seems that "checkout" is used internally and "brev" is used for
user-facing output. I wish this code were better documented. But that is
scope bloat...


>
> diff --git a/mercurial/commands.py b/mercurial/commands.py
> --- a/mercurial/commands.py
> +++ b/mercurial/commands.py
> @@ -4488,7 +4488,7 @@ def pull(ui, repo, source="default", **o
>              brev = None
>
>              if checkout:
> -                checkout = repo.changelog.rev(checkout)
> +                checkout = repo.unfiltered().changelog.rev(checkout)
>
>                  # order below depends on implementation of
>                  # hg.addbranchrevs(). opts['bookmark'] is ignored,
> diff --git a/tests/test-obsolete-distributed.t
> b/tests/test-obsolete-distributed.t
> --- a/tests/test-obsolete-distributed.t
> +++ b/tests/test-obsolete-distributed.t
> @@ -488,6 +488,22 @@ decision is made in that case, so receiv
>    d33b0a3a64647d79583526be8107802b1f9fedfa
> 5b5708a437f27665db42c5a261a539a1bcb2a8c2 0 (Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000)
> {'ef1': '1', 'operation': 'amend', 'user': 'bob'}
>    ef908e42ce65ef57f970d799acaddde26f58a4cc
> 5ffb9e311b35f6ab6f76f667ca5d6e595645481b 0 (Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000)
> {'ef1': '4', 'operation': 'rebase', 'user': 'bob'}
>
> +
> +Same tests, but with --rev, this prevent regressing case where `hg pull
> --rev
> +X` has to process a X that is filtered locally.
> +
> +  $ hg rollback
> +  repository tip rolled back to revision 4 (undo unbundle)
> +  $ hg pull ../repo-Bob --rev 956063ac4557
> +  pulling from ../repo-Bob
> +  searching for changes
> +  adding changesets
> +  adding manifests
> +  adding file changes
> +  added 2 changesets with 0 changes to 2 files (+1 heads)
> +  (2 other changesets obsolete on arrival)
> +  (run 'hg heads' to see heads)
> +
>    $ cd ..
>
>  Test pull report consistency
> _______________________________________________
> Mercurial-devel mailing list
> Mercurial-devel at mercurial-scm.org
> https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.mercurial-scm.org/pipermail/mercurial-devel/attachments/20190416/2dfa3e3c/attachment.html>