It seems obvious in hindsight to have a virtual root operation just
like we have a virtual root commit. It removes the same kind of
problems by making sure there's always a common ancestor (or multiple)
between any two commits.
I think the reason I didn't add a root operation from the beginning
was that there used to be a mandatory working-copy commit in the view
(this was before support for multiple workspaces).
Perhaps we should remove the "initialize repo" operation now. The only
difference between their view objects is that the "initialize repo"
operation adds the root commit as a head. We could add that to the
root operation, but then the root operation's value depends on the
commit backend.
We've had the public_heads for as long as we've had the View object,
IIRC (I didn't check), but we still don't use it for anything. I don't
have any concrete plans for using it either. Maybe our config for
immutable commits is good enough, or maybe we'll want something more
generic (like Mercurial's phases). For now, I think we should simplify
by removing it the storage for public heads.
Summary: A natural extension of the existing support, as suggested by Scott
Olson. Closes#2496.
Signed-off-by: Austin Seipp <aseipp@pobox.com>
Change-Id: I91c9c8c377ad67ccde7945ed41af6c79
Summary: Yuya's changes and mine had a semantic conflict ("merge skew") between
the two of them, as b7c7b19e changed the `op log `output slightly, whereas
220292ad included a new test that used `op log` itself.
Generated by `cargo insta review`.
Signed-off-by: Austin Seipp <aseipp@pobox.com>
Change-Id: I51d4de7316b1abc09be4f9fa0dd0d1a1
There's a subtle behavior change. Unlike the original remove_remote_branch(),
remote_views entry is not discarded when the branches map becomes empty. The
reasoning here is that the remote view can be added/removed when the remote
is added/removed respectively, though that's not implemented yet. Since the
serialized data cannot represent an empty remote, such view may generate
non-unique content hash.
Summary: This allows `workspace forget` to forget multiple workspaces in a
single action; it now behaves more consistently with other verbs like `abandon`
which can take multiple revisions at one time.
There's some hoop-jumping involved to ensure the oplog transaction description
looks nice, but as they say: small conveniences cost a lot.
Signed-off-by: Austin Seipp <aseipp@pobox.com>
Change-Id: Id91da269f87b145010c870b7dc043748
Summary: Workspaces are most useful to test different versions (commits) of
the tree within the same repository, but in many cases you want to check out a
specific commit within a workspace.
Make that trivial with a `--revision` option which will be used as the basis
for the new workspace. If no `-r` option is given, then the previous behavior
applies: the workspace is created with a working copy commit created on top of
the current working copy commit's parent.
Signed-off-by: Austin Seipp <aseipp@pobox.com>
Change-Id: I23549efe29bc23fb9f75437b6023c237
I have used the tree-level conflict format for several weeks without
problem (after the fix in 51b5d168ae). Now - right after the 0.10.0
release - seems like a good time to enable the config by default.
I enabled the config in our default configs in the CLI crate to reduce
impact on tests (compared to changing the default in `settings.rs`).
We resolve file paths into repo-relative paths while parsing the
revset expression, so I think it's consistent to also resolve which
workspace "@" refers to while parsing it. That means we won't need the
workspace context both while parsing and while resolving symbols.
In order to break things like `author("martinvonz@")` (thanks to @yuja
for catching this), I also changed the parsing of working-copy
expressions so they are not allowed to be
quoted. `author(martinvonz@)` will therefore be an error now. That
seems like a small improvement anyway, since we have recently talked
about making `root` and `[workspace]@` not parsed as other symbols.
