##// END OF EJS Templates
wireproto: use CBOR for command requests...
wireproto: use CBOR for command requests Now that we're using CBOR in the new wire protocol, let's convert command requests to it. Before I wrote this patch and was even thinking about CBOR, I was thinking about how commands should be issued and came to the conclusion that we didn't need separate frames to represent the command name from its arguments. I already had a partially completed patch prepared to merge the frames. But with CBOR, it makes the implementation a bit simpler because we don't need to roll our own serialization. The changes here are a bit invasive. I tried to split this into multiple commits to make it easier to review. But it was just too hard. * "command name" and "command argument" frames have been collapsed into a "command request" frame. * The flags for this new frame are totally different. * Frame processing has been overhauled to reflect the new order of things. * Test fallout was significant. A handful of tests were removed. Altogether, I think the new code is simpler. We don't have complicated state around receiving commands. We're either receiving command request frames or command data frames. We /could/ potentially collapse command data frames into command request frames. Although I'd have to think a bit more about this before I do it. Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D2951

File last commit:

r35550:bb5a03df default
r37308:3d0e2cd8 default
Show More
graphentry.tmpl
8 lines | 320 B | application/x-cheetah | CheetahLexer
<li class="parity{parity}" data-node="{node|short}">
<div class="fg">
<span class="desc">
<a href="{url|urlescape}rev/{node|short}{sessionvars%urlparameter}">{desc|strip|firstline|escape|nonempty}</a>
</span>
<div class="info"><span class="age">{date|rfc822date}</span>, by {author|person}</div>
</div>
</li>