merging chg into contrib tree?

[Yuya Nishihara]

On Fri, 06 Nov 2015 18:24:15 -0500, Pierre-Yves David wrote:
> On 11/02/2015 10:35 AM, Yuya Nishihara wrote:
> > https://www.mercurial-scm.org/wiki/ChgPortingPlan
> >
> > My preference is:
> >
> >   1. how to merge?
> >
> >      reorganize as 10+ patches (base, pager, setenv, sendfds, ...)
> 
> I would be happy to drop a full history of chg converted to dispatch the 
> file in the right place. Having full history is always useful when 
> digging into bugs.
> 
> >   2. source layout
> >
> >      (frontend)
> >      contrib/chg/Makefile
> >                  README
> >                  chg.c
> >                  hgclient.[ch]
> >                  util.[ch]
> >      (server)
> >      hgext/chgserver.py
> >      mercurial/osutil.c <- chgutil.c
> 
> Why having chgserver.py in hgext? as we know we want chg as a first 
> class citizen, could have the server logic in core?

I made an experimental mercurial repository that includes most of the chg
changes.

https://bitbucket.org/yuja/mercurial-chg-porting/#chg

Still it doesn't pass all test-check-*.t and chgserver.py is placed under
hgext/. Several manual tweaks will be necessary.

C sources are formatted by the following rule plus dirty regexp.

https://bitbucket.org/yuja/chg-porting/src/55b740b2db9a/.clang-format
https://bitbucket.org/yuja/chg-porting/src/55b740b2db9a/Rakefile#Rakefile-160

So, do we really want to go this way? or fold patches?

Regards,