Wed, 25 Jul 2018 16:23:25 -0700 builddependencies: share code between single- and multi-successor cases
Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz@google.com> [Wed, 25 Jul 2018 16:23:25 -0700] rev 3905
builddependencies: share code between single- and multi-successor cases The two cases now have more similar structure ("if succ in revs: dependencies[r].add(succ)"), so let's share the code so it doesn't start drifting apart again.
Wed, 25 Jul 2018 14:33:48 -0700 builddependencies: build inverse dict from forward dict
Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz@google.com> [Wed, 25 Jul 2018 14:33:48 -0700] rev 3904
builddependencies: build inverse dict from forward dict It's error-prone to keep "dependencies" and "rdependencies" in sync (we don't do it correctly when there are multiple successors or a node). It's easier to just create "rependencies" from "dependencies" after it's complete.
Wed, 25 Jul 2018 14:21:49 -0700 builddependencies: remove a use of defaultdict
Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz@google.com> [Wed, 25 Jul 2018 14:21:49 -0700] rev 3903
builddependencies: remove a use of defaultdict I don't see much reason to make "rdependencies" be a defaultdict when "dependencies" is not. It's easy to initialize each entry ourselves.
Tue, 31 Jul 2018 09:03:35 +0200 branching: merge with stable
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Tue, 31 Jul 2018 09:03:35 +0200] rev 3902
branching: merge with stable
Wed, 25 Jul 2018 15:30:37 -0700 builddependencies: don't remove found deps when divergence found (issue5946) stable
Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz@google.com> [Wed, 25 Jul 2018 15:30:37 -0700] rev 3901
builddependencies: don't remove found deps when divergence found (issue5946) It seems obviously wrong to not keep any dependencies for a revision that we had already found (for p1) if we run into divergence (from p2). It also happens to fix issue5946 :)
Wed, 25 Jul 2018 14:47:16 -0700 builddependencies: don't add dependency on revision outside input set stable
Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz@google.com> [Wed, 25 Jul 2018 14:47:16 -0700] rev 3900
builddependencies: don't add dependency on revision outside input set This was already handled in the single-successor case, but had been missed in the multiple-successors case. Note that there seems to be a copy of builddependencies() in the topics extension. I don't use topics more than I have to, so I'll let someone else fix that code.
Wed, 25 Jul 2018 15:16:25 -0700 builddependencies: consider all divergent successors stable
Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz@google.com> [Wed, 25 Jul 2018 15:16:25 -0700] rev 3899
builddependencies: consider all divergent successors We were only considering one. In test-evolve-abort-conentdiv.t:165, the input revs were {5, 8} and dependency dict was {8: set([]), 5: set([10])}, which is a little weird (10 is not in the input set). It still worked because the callers used it (they seemed to only care if there were *any* dependencies). This patch fixes the issue by considering all successors. That means the dependency dict will be {8: set([]), 5: set([8, 10])} after this patch. The next patch will remove the 10 from that set.
(0) -3000 -1000 -300 -100 -30 -10 -7 +7 +10 +30 +100 +300 +1000 tip