I'm going to redirect progress message to stderr, but the current Ui API
makes it less clear whether the underlying streams of .write*()/.flush()/
.output_guard() are related or not.
If one side changes the contents and one side changes the executable
bit, we get a non-trivial conflict in the `TreeValue`s, but once we've
split them up into `FileId`s and bools, we can trivially resolve them
separately, without having to read file contents.
It seems generally useful to be able to simplify a conflict, and it's
not specific to merging trees, so let's move it to
`conflicts.rs`. Once we're done with the migration to tree-level
conflicts, I think `Conflict::simplify()` will remain but
`tree::simplify_conflict()` will be gone.
The tests I added there are quite similar to those of
`trivial_merge()`. I hope we can make `Conflict::simplify()` call
`trivial_merge()` later. I think it would also make sense to move
`trivial_merge()` onto `Conflict`, or at least have a
`Conflict::resolve_trivial()` calling `trivial_merge()`.
Since we switched to the new `conflicts::Conflict` type, we represent
a missing tree entry by a `None` value in the conflict, not a missing
"add", so the condition removed in this commit will never happen, and
the case will be handled by the case just below it instead.
For tree-level conflicts (#1624), I plan to remove `ConflictId`
completely. This commit removes `ConflictId` from
`update_conflict_from_content()` by instead making it take a
`Conflict<Option<TreeValue>>` and return a possibly different such
value.
I made the call site in `working_copy` avoid writing the conflict to
the store if it's unchanged, but I didn't make the same optimization
in `merge_tools` becuase it's much more likely to have changed there.
Use `br@git` instead.
Before, if there is not a local branch `br`, jj tried to resolve
it as a git ref `refs/heads/br`. Unchanged from before, `br` can
still be resolved as a tag `refs/tag/br`.
This doesn't change the way @git branches are stored in `git_refs` as opposed
to inside `BranchTarget` like normal remote-tracking branches. There are
subtle differences in behavior with e.g. `jj branch forget` and I'm not sure
how easy it is to rewrite `jj git import/export` to support a different
way of storage.
I've decided to call these "local-git tracking branches" since they track
branches in the local git repository. "local git-tracking" branches sounds a
bit more natural, but these could be confused with there are no remote
git-tracking branches. If one had the idea these might exist, they would be
confused with remote-tracking branches in the local git repo.
This addresses a portion of #1666
Since stdout is wrapped with LineWriter, we need to explicitly flush the
output. Otherwise the snapshot progress would persist until newline character
is printed.
It might also be better to send progress to stderr?
Suppose the operation log is mostly linear, this means "jj op log" iterator
won't look ahead more than one entry.
Another idea is to either add a "generation" number to operation data, or
build index of operations. Since we'll eventually add GC command, I don't
think op index would be required. I think readdir() is good enough to resolve
hex prefix against ~10k entries.
For now, walk_ancestors() is a free function. If we add Repo-like abstraction
over OpStore + OpHeadsStore, this function will probably be migrated there.
The idea is that the DAG can be split at single fork point while walking
chronologically, and run DFS-based topological sort for each sub graph.
This works well for operation log.
We could also build a topo-sort stack while splitting, but we couldn't detect
cycles in that way. It would also be quite expensive on pessimistic cases.
Since e48ace56d1, the number of adds in the hunk is always exactly
one more than enumber of removes, so we can simplify the condition and
the error message accordingly.
