From: William Giokas <1007380@gmail.com>
To: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Cc: "Junio C Hamano" <gitster@pobox.com>,
"Torsten Bögershausen" <tboegi@web.de>,
"Charles Brossollet" <chbrosso@lltech.fr>,
git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Error using git-remote-hg
Date: Tue, 13 May 2014 14:39:11 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140513193911.GG9051@wst420> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53726e0355875_4aa4b312f892@nysa.notmuch>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3005 bytes --]
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 02:09:55PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> William Giokas wrote:
> > On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 10:30:26AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> > > Why do we "import changegroup" unconditionally, even though it
> > > is only used in the new codepath meant only for version 3.0 or
> > > higher, not inside the "if" block that decides if we need that
> > > module?
>
> > changegroup is prefectly /okay/ to import unconditionally, though as you
> > say it will never be used.
>
> As you say, it's perfectly OK.
But wrong. Yes, it works, but it's not how it should be done when we
have a code review such as this. It should simply not be done and makes
no sense to do with an 'if <check ver>; else' kind of thing later in the
application.
>
> > We can also be even more explicit with what we import by doing something
> > like::
> >
> > try:
> > from mercurial.changegroup import getbundle
> >
> > except ImportError:
> > def getbundle(__empty__, **kwargs):
> > return repo.getbundle(**kwargs)
>
> We could try that, but that would assume we want to maintain getbundle()
> for the long run, and I personally don't want to do that. I would rather
> contact the Mercurial developers about ways in which the push() method
> can be improved so we don't need to have our own version. Hopefully
> after it's improved we wouldn't have to call getbundle().
Assuming that mercurial <3.0 will not change, then this should never
need to change. Changes in 'getbundle' upstream would require changes
either way.
> Moreover, eventually there will be a Mercurial 4.0, even 5.0, and at
> some point we would want to remove the hacks for older versions. When we
> do so we would want the import to remain unconditionally, and remove the
> 'check_version(3, 0)' which is already helping to explain what the code
> is for without the need of comments.
The same exact thing can be done with this. In fact, it would probably
allow us to have better future-proofing with regards to new versions of
mercurial, there would just be different try:except statements at the
beginning.
>
> > I was really sad to see that, and didn't have time to really look at it
> > because of work and other projects, but I hope this presents a better
> > solution than the current patch.
>
> Either way Junio doesn't maintain this code, I do. And it's not
> maintained in git.git, git's maintained out-of-tree (thanks to Junio's
> decisions).
I still see it in git.git, and I will contribute this upstream for as
long as it is in the tree. If you want to use the patch that I sent to
this list, feel free.
> So please post your suggestions and patches to git-fc@googlegroups.com,
> and use the latest code at https://github.com/felipec/git-remote-hg.
Thanks,
--
William Giokas | KaiSforza | http://kaictl.net/
GnuPG Key: 0x73CD09CF
Fingerprint: F73F 50EF BBE2 9846 8306 E6B8 6902 06D8 73CD 09CF
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-13 19:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-12 15:16 Error using git-remote-hg Charles Brossollet
2014-05-12 19:01 ` Torsten Bögershausen
2014-05-12 19:37 ` Felipe Contreras
2014-05-13 7:54 ` Charles Brossollet
2014-05-13 15:01 ` Torsten Bögershausen
2014-05-13 17:30 ` Junio C Hamano
2014-05-13 18:21 ` Felipe Contreras
2014-05-13 18:48 ` William Giokas
2014-05-13 19:09 ` Felipe Contreras
2014-05-13 19:39 ` William Giokas [this message]
2014-05-13 20:24 ` Felipe Contreras
2014-05-13 21:01 ` William Giokas
2014-05-13 22:16 ` Felipe Contreras
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140513193911.GG9051@wst420 \
--to=1007380@gmail.com \
--cc=chbrosso@lltech.fr \
--cc=felipe.contreras@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=tboegi@web.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).