[PATCH 1 of 2] eol: do not wait on lack when writing cache

[Pierre-Yves David]

On 10/13/2016 03:21 PM, Mads Kiilerich wrote:
> On 10/13/2016 01:53 PM, Pierre-Yves David wrote:
>> # HG changeset patch
>> # User Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david at ens-lyon.org>
>> # Date 1476359131 -7200
>> #      Thu Oct 13 13:45:31 2016 +0200
>> # Node ID 88cc944830d0c1895e527d6ca13687f1d5e1c785
>> # Parent  747e546c561fbf34d07cd30013eaf42b0190bb3b
>> eol: do not wait on lack when writing cache
>>
>> The cache writing process is properly catching and handling the case
>> where the
>> lock is unavailable. However, it fails to specify the lock can failed
>> to be
>> acquired when requesting it. This is now fixed.
>
> Hmm.
>
> *If* the user has write access to the repo and *could* lock the repo,
> then it seems reasonable that it waits for the lock and does the right
> thing. It would be unfortunate to bail out early and happily continue to
> expose the less optimal state that read only users might have to deal with.

The change introduced by this changeset make the cache in line with how 
most of other cache works in Mercurial. The lock don't really have time 
out so simple read only command could hold themself forever if make this 
call blocking. Given than eol is probably not going to be user on pulling

> I thus don't think this change would make it less reliable ... and I
> don't see it solving a real problem.

The idea is to align it with what other cache do (reducing the chance of 
simple command working).

> (The next change for proper release is however +1.)

yep, next one is a must go ☺

-- 
Pierre-Yves David