##// END OF EJS Templates
identify: add template support...
identify: add template support This is based on a patch proposed last year by Mathias De Maré[1], with a few changes. - Tags and bookmarks are now formatted lists, for more flexible queries. - The templater is populated whether or not [-nibtB] is specified. (Plain output is unchanged.) This seems more consistent with other templated commands. - The 'id' property is a string, instead of a list. - The parents of 'wdir()' have their own list of attributes. I left 'id' as a string because it seems very useful for generating version info. It's also a bit strange because the value and meaning changes depending on whether or not --debug is passed (short vs full hash), whether the revision is a merge or not (one hash or two, separated by a '+'), the working directory or not (node vs p1node), and local or not (remote defaults to tip, and never has '+'). The equivalent string built with {rev} seems much less useful, and I couldn't think of a reasonable name, so I left it out. The discussion seemed to be pointing towards having a list of nodes, with more than one entry for a merge. It seems simpler to give the nodes a name, and use {node} for the actual commit probed, especially now that there is a virtual node for 'wdir()'. Yuya mentioned using fm.nested() in that thread, so I did for the parent nodes. I'm not sure if the plan is to fill in all of the context attributes in these items, or if these nested items should simply be made {p1node} and {p1rev}. I used ':' as the tag separator for consistency with {tags} in the log templater. Likewise, bookmarks are separated by a space for consistency with the corresponding log template. [1] https://www.mercurial-scm.org/pipermail/mercurial-devel/2016-August/087039.html

File last commit:

r26420:2fc86d92 default
r33051:15a79ac8 default
Show More
test-issue522.t
55 lines | 1.6 KiB | text/troff | Tads3Lexer
https://bz.mercurial-scm.org/522
In the merge below, the file "foo" has the same contents in both
parents, but if we look at the file-level history, we'll notice that
the version in p1 is an ancestor of the version in p2. This test makes
sure that we'll use the version from p2 in the manifest of the merge
revision.
$ hg init
$ echo foo > foo
$ hg ci -qAm 'add foo'
$ echo bar >> foo
$ hg ci -m 'change foo'
$ hg backout -r tip -m 'backout changed foo'
reverting foo
changeset 2:4d9e78aaceee backs out changeset 1:b515023e500e
$ hg up -C 0
1 files updated, 0 files merged, 0 files removed, 0 files unresolved
$ touch bar
$ hg ci -qAm 'add bar'
$ hg merge --debug
searching for copies back to rev 1
unmatched files in local:
bar
resolving manifests
branchmerge: True, force: False, partial: False
ancestor: bbd179dfa0a7, local: 71766447bdbb+, remote: 4d9e78aaceee
foo: remote is newer -> g
getting foo
1 files updated, 0 files merged, 0 files removed, 0 files unresolved
(branch merge, don't forget to commit)
$ hg debugstate | grep foo
m 0 -2 unset foo
$ hg st -A foo
M foo
$ hg ci -m 'merge'
$ hg manifest --debug | grep foo
c6fc755d7e68f49f880599da29f15add41f42f5a 644 foo
$ hg debugindex foo
rev offset length ..... linkrev nodeid p1 p2 (re)
0 0 5 ..... 0 2ed2a3912a0b 000000000000 000000000000 (re)
1 5 9 ..... 1 6f4310b00b9a 2ed2a3912a0b 000000000000 (re)
2 14 5 ..... 2 c6fc755d7e68 6f4310b00b9a 000000000000 (re)