Without specifying the parent revision of the working copy, users will
update to tip, which is most likely the other head they were trying to
merge, not the revision they were at before the merge.
This is a revert of f6aa66376f81. The "bug" mentioned in this changeset is unclear:
hopefully using a test to cover this usage should prevent any bugs.
Since d6ca622d1122 the branch argument for addbranchrevs should be a tuple:
(hashbranch, branches)
The right empty value therefore is (None, []) instead of None.
Previously #foo and --branch foo were handled identically.
The behavior of #foo hasn't changed, but --branch now works like this:
1) If branchmap is not supported on the remote, the operation fails.
2) If branch is '.', substitute with branch of the working dir parent.
3) If branch exists remotely, its heads are expanded.
4) Otherwise, the operation fails.
Tests have been added for the new cases.
When trying to do hardlink-cloning, the os_link() call of the
first file tried already fails on Windows, if the source is on a
UNC path.
This change avoids calling os_link() for the rest of files, leaving
us with a *single* failed os_link() call per clone operation, if the
source can't do hardlinks.
When trying to do hardlink-cloning, the os_link() call of the
first file tried already fails on Windows, if the source is on a
UNC path.
This change avoids calling os_link() for the rest of files, leaving
us with a *single* failed os_link() call per clone operation, if the
source can't do hardlinks.
This avoids problem with unexpanded paths when it's not possible to
expand it at higher level (for example, if file:~/path/ is supplied as
path in schemes).
Previously, the name part of an repo#name url was interpreted as a
revision, similar to using the --rev option. Now it is instead looked
up as a branch first, and if that succeeds all the heads of the branch
will be processed instead of just its tip-most head. If the branch
lookup fails, it will be assumed to be an revision as before (e.g. for
tags).
Combining translated string fragments into bigger strings is bad
practice because it removes context from the fragments. The translator
sees the fragments in isolation and might not jump back to the source
to see how a string like "%d files %s" is actually used.
