[Commented On] D8529: flags: introduce explicit testing for merging change to exec flag

[marmoute (Pierre-Yves David)]

marmoute added a comment.


  In D8529#127681 <https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D8529#127681>, @durin42 wrote:
  
  > I'm okay with the series, but I'm a little hesitant to put something this big on stable. Can you sway me one way or the other?
  
  Most of the "size" is about adding new tests which is less dangerous than code.
  
    Patch-1: test only
    Patch-2: test only
    Patch-3: small test change, easy to double check (we if flag changed, this is not the same content)
    Patch-4: test only
    Patch-5: a score of new line, but the fundamental logic is quite simple: we do a three way merge on the flags.
    Patch-6: test only
    Patch-7: The most "slippery" one because we change existing code. However, the previous code was obviously wrong and no test barked when I changed it
    Patch-8: test only, could easilly go on default later
    Patch-89: test only, could easilly go on default later
  
  Everything up to Patch-3 is straightforward and worries free. Up to Patch-5 seems simple and fine. Up to Patch 7 is fixing an anoying bug that I would rather see fixed on stable.
  
  Does that help ?

REPOSITORY
  rHG Mercurial

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D8529/new/

REVISION DETAIL
  https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D8529

To: marmoute, #hg-reviewers, durin42
Cc: durin42, mercurial-patches
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mercurial-scm.org/pipermail/mercurial-patches/attachments/20200522/e9a2177a/attachment-0002.html>