[Commented On] D8596: merge: mark copies in in-memory context when merging

[marmoute (Pierre-Yves David)]

marmoute added inline comments.

INLINE COMMENTS

> marmoute wrote in merge.py:1891
> no, phabricator diffing made me think we were in the following function, that takes it as an argument:
> 
>   def applyupdates(
>       repo, actions, wctx, mctx, overwrite, wantfiledata, labels=None
>   ):

Actually, thinking more about it, I still don't know why we should overlook rename information when overwriting. Can you clarify that point  in a comment ?

> mergestate.py:766
>  
>      # forget (must come first)
>      for f, args, msg in actions.get(ACTION_FORGET, []):

Okay, so why do we have both a `applyupdates` and `recordupdates` function ? What are their respective resonsability and why is it split ?

Is it that `apply` is only responsible for touching the disk content and `record` to only update internal metadata like the dirstate ? If so, moving the copies recording out of recordupdates seems wrong.

REPOSITORY
  rHG Mercurial

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D8596/new/

REVISION DETAIL
  https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D8596

To: martinvonz, #hg-reviewers, marmoute
Cc: marmoute, durin42, mercurial-patches
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mercurial-scm.org/pipermail/mercurial-patches/attachments/20200611/9dbfde3c/attachment-0002.html>