##// END OF EJS Templates
wireprotov2: implement commands as a generator of objects...
wireprotov2: implement commands as a generator of objects Previously, wire protocol version 2 inherited version 1's model of having separate types to represent the results of different wire protocol commands. As I implemented more powerful commands in future commits, I found I was using a common pattern of returning a special type to hold a generator. This meant the command function required a closure to do most of the work. That made logic flow more difficult to follow. I also noticed that many commands were effectively a sequence of objects to be CBOR encoded. I think it makes sense to define version 2 commands as generators. This way, commands can simply emit the data structures they wish to send to the client. This eliminates the need for a closure in command functions and removes encoding from the bodies of commands. As part of this commit, the handling of response objects has been moved into the serverreactor class. This puts the reactor in the driver's seat with regards to CBOR encoding and error handling. Having error handling in the function that emits frames is particularly important because exceptions in that function can lead to things getting in a bad state: I'm fairly certain that uncaught exceptions in the frame generator were causing deadlocks. I also introduced a dedicated error type for explicit error reporting in command handlers. This will be used in subsequent commits. There's still a bit of work to be done here, especially around formalizing the error handling "protocol." I've added yet another TODO to track this so we don't forget. Test output changed because we're using generators and no longer know we are at the end of the data until we hit the end of the generator. This means we can't emit the end-of-stream flag until we've exhausted the generator. Hence the introduction of 0-sized end-of-stream frames. Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D4472

File last commit:

r34662:eb586ed5 default
r39595:07b58266 default
Show More
test-bundle-vs-outgoing.t
143 lines | 2.4 KiB | text/troff | Tads3Lexer
/ tests / test-bundle-vs-outgoing.t
this structure seems to tickle a bug in bundle's search for
changesets, so first we have to recreate it
o 8
|
| o 7
| |
| o 6
|/|
o | 5
| |
o | 4
| |
| o 3
| |
| o 2
|/
o 1
|
o 0
$ mkrev()
> {
> revno=$1
> echo "rev $revno"
> echo "rev $revno" > foo.txt
> hg -q ci -m"rev $revno"
> }
setup test repo1
$ hg init repo1
$ cd repo1
$ echo "rev 0" > foo.txt
$ hg ci -Am"rev 0"
adding foo.txt
$ mkrev 1
rev 1
first branch
$ mkrev 2
rev 2
$ mkrev 3
rev 3
back to rev 1 to create second branch
$ hg up -r1
1 files updated, 0 files merged, 0 files removed, 0 files unresolved
$ mkrev 4
rev 4
$ mkrev 5
rev 5
merge first branch to second branch
$ hg up -C -r5
0 files updated, 0 files merged, 0 files removed, 0 files unresolved
$ HGMERGE=internal:local hg merge
0 files updated, 1 files merged, 0 files removed, 0 files unresolved
(branch merge, don't forget to commit)
$ echo "merge rev 5, rev 3" > foo.txt
$ hg ci -m"merge first branch to second branch"
one more commit following the merge
$ mkrev 7
rev 7
back to "second branch" to make another head
$ hg up -r5
1 files updated, 0 files merged, 0 files removed, 0 files unresolved
$ mkrev 8
rev 8
the story so far
$ hg log -G --template "{rev}\n"
@ 8
|
| o 7
| |
| o 6
|/|
o | 5
| |
o | 4
| |
| o 3
| |
| o 2
|/
o 1
|
o 0
check that "hg outgoing" really does the right thing
sanity check of outgoing: expect revs 4 5 6 7 8
$ hg clone -r3 . ../repo2
adding changesets
adding manifests
adding file changes
added 4 changesets with 4 changes to 1 files
new changesets 6ae4cca4e39a:478f191e53f8
updating to branch default
1 files updated, 0 files merged, 0 files removed, 0 files unresolved
this should (and does) report 5 outgoing revisions: 4 5 6 7 8
$ hg outgoing --template "{rev}\n" ../repo2
comparing with ../repo2
searching for changes
4
5
6
7
8
test bundle (destination repo): expect 5 revisions
this should bundle the same 5 revisions that outgoing reported, but it
actually bundles 7
$ hg bundle foo.bundle ../repo2
searching for changes
5 changesets found
test bundle (base revision): expect 5 revisions
this should (and does) give exactly the same result as bundle
with a destination repo... i.e. it's wrong too
$ hg bundle --base 3 foo.bundle
5 changesets found
$ cd ..